Attila - the quest for the Sword of Mars E-Book

M. Traugott Huber

• Herausgeber: BoD - Books on Demand
• Kategorie: Geisteswissenschaft
• Sprache: Englisch
• Veröffentlichungsjahr: 2024

Seitenzahl: 838

Beschreibung

The Huns are part of Europe's rich history. The direct Hunnic impact on Europe as it stood around 370 was massive. Attila is one of the few names from antiquity that is still instantly recognised. Three famous experts on the Huns - Otto Maenchen-Helfen (1973), Edward Thompson (1948, 1996), and Mischa Meier (2020) - contributed significantly to our knowledge, but they failed to answer the five most important questions on Attila and the Huns: - Which was the native country of the Huns? - Where are the capitals and tombs of Attila's royal ancestors - Uldin, Charaton, and Ruga? - Where did Attila's decisive Battle of the Catalaunian Plains really take place? - Where is Attila's lost capital? - Where is Attila's legendary tomb with his fabled Sword of Mars? This book provides answers to each of these five questions, while also solving other mysteries - the identity of the enigmatic river Drecon, the name of the village of Attila's sister-in-law, and the true course of Attila's Gallic campaign in 451 and his Italian campaign in 452.

Leseprobe

This book is dedicated to my grandchildRonja Nelly

Contents

1. Introduction

2. The homeland of Attila and the Huns

2.1 Introduction

2.2 Where did the Huns originate?

2.3 What did Eurasia look like at the arrival of the Huns?

2.4 Summary

3. The location of the capitals and tombs of Attila’s ancestors

3.1 Introduction

3.2 Timeline and progress of the Huns from 360 to 454

3.3 The moving capital of the Huns

3.3.1 The capital of King Uldin

3.3.2 The capital and tomb of King Charaton

3.3.3 The capital and tomb of King Ruga

3.4 Summary

4. The location of Attila’s battle at the Catalaunian Plains

Appendix – electronically published under https://independent.academia.edu/MTRH

4.1 Introduction

4.2 The big picture in 451

4.3 The route of Attila

4.4 The two traditional locations for this battle

4.5 Campis Catalaunicis and pugnam Mauriacensem

4.6 What really happened in 451?

4.7 The true battlefield – Cenabum

4.8 The four concordant sources for the Battle of Cenabum

4.9 The aftermath of the Battle of Cenabum

4.10 Preliminary conclusions

4.11 What can be found and which methods shall be applied?

4.12 Conclusions

5. The location of Attila’s capital

5.1 Introduction

5.2 Priscus’ travelogue – the first part

5.3 The enigmatic Drecon – its identity finally resolved

5.4 Priscus’ travelogue – the second part

5.5 Attila’s capital – is there any proof for its location?

5.6 Attila’s capital – the opinions of earlier scholars

5.7 The true location of Attila’s capital

5.8 Priscus’ additional information on Attila’s capital

5.9 Four final questions

6. The location of Attila’s tomb

6.1 Introduction

6.2 Three trails

6.2.1 Are there any conclusions to be made from the burial practices of the Huns?

6.2.2 Are there any conclusions to be made from Attila’s life?

6.2.3 Can any conclusions be drawn from the records regarding Attila’s death?

6.3 Attila’s Tomb – suggestions by earlier scholars

6.4 The quest for the tomb of Attila

6.4.1 Which burial method?

6.4.2 Which direction from the capital?

6.4.3 What is the tomb’s distance from the capital?

6.5 Reconstruction of the landscape in 453

6.6 The promising location for Attila’s tomb

6.6.1 The identification of eleven spots

6.6.2 The likelihood of these eleven spots

6.6.3 The most promising spot for Attila’s tomb

6.7 The next steps

7. Conclusion

8. Acknowledgments

9. Photo credits

10. Indices

11. References

La science, c’est la recherche de la vérité.(Abbé Desnoyers, 1876)

1. INTRODUCTION

The Huns were a major force in Europe in the first half of the 5th century. They were the first of the mighty Asian conquerors, paving the way for the Avars in the 6th, the Magyars in the 9th, and the Mongols in the 13th century.

The Huns’ annihilation of the Ostrogothic Empire of Ermanaric in the 370s and the expulsion of the Visigoths set the initial impetus for the first phase of the Great Migration – the Völkerwanderung. This event shaped the face of Europe and many of its modern borders. “Attila half eine alte Welt zerstören und eine neue gründen” (Clesca, 1836: 3). Fóthi (2000: 8990) states: “it is a fact of history that the collapse of the Western Roman Empire was brought about by the movements of peoples initiated by the Huns”. “Without the appearance of the Huns there would have been no Visigothic kingdom of Toulouse, no Ostrogothic kingdom in Italy, no Vandal kingdom in Africa”; Thompson (1996: 237) then adds “as early as in fact there where”. But this is conjecture. It is more likely that without the Huns, the history of Europe would look very different. Heather (2015: 228) concludes: “the direct Hunnic impact on the central zone of barbarian Europe as it stood around 350 was massive.” Mathisen (2019) demonstrates that in the end it was not invasions but barbarian and Roman warlords and civil wars that destroyed the Western Roman Empire. Nonetheless, without the process initiated by the Huns, the collapse of the Western Roman Empire would have been delayed, perhaps by centuries. The European Medieval period would definitely not have started in 476 but at a significantly later date.

The recorded Hunnic history extends for a century, from 376 to 469, whereby they dominated Europe in the mid-5th century. The first reliable mention of the true Huns originates from the Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus, datable to the year 376. In his final Book 31 of Res Gestae, he paints a horrible picture of a “race savage beyond all parallel.” Mainly from Roman sources we know of the first Hunnic King Uldin (400-08) ruling from Muntenia in modern Romania, King Charaton (412/3) ruling from modern northeastern Serbia, and King Ruga (c. 422-34) ruling from modern northern Serbia. His nephew Bleda as the successor (434), Bleda and Attila as coregents (c. 434-44), and Attila as the sole king of the Huns (444-53) represent the apogee of the Huns. Attila’s sons Ellac (453-54) and Dengizich (454-69) demonstrate the rapid decline of a mighty nation. Ellac lost the decisive Battle of Nedao and his life in 454. The importance of the Huns thus imploded. The head of Attila’s irrelevant son, Dengizich, was brought to Constantinople in 469 and fixed on a pole. Prior to the death of Attila’s youngest son, the ephemeral Ernak, the Huns vanished from history. Other tribes, particularly the expelled Visigoths and the once subdued Ostrogoths, completed the destruction of the Western Roman Empire by 476 and thus ended the first phase of the Great Migration.

Attila is undoubtedly the best-known king of the Huns. Attila was of noble origins. His father Mundzuc was the brother of the ruling kings Ruga and Octar. “Priscus’ report on Attila … showing a ruler who was incredibly adroit at power politics, ruthless against enemies and traitors, yet also surprisingly modest in his lifestyle, generous to his allies, and a loving father to his sons” (Wijnendaele, 2020: 2). Attila was most likely born around 400 in the Romanian Muntenia, probably in the area of Buzău. He became co-ruler in his mid-thirties, sometime after the accession of his elder brother Bleda after April 434. In 435, the two Hunnic kings Bleda and Attila forced the Eastern Roman Empire into the humiliating Treaty of Margus. In 441-2, in the absence of Roman troops, they took their chance. Bleda and Attila destroyed all the major Eastern Roman forts and cities along the middle Danube. After the death of Bleda, Attila once again plundered the Balkans and more than 70 cities in 447. The Byzantine Emperor Theodosius II declared a shameful defeat and had to pay an enormous ransom. For August 450, Hohlfelder (1984: 54) states: “Attila, sole king of the Huns and quite likely the most powerful ruler in the world at that time”. The next year, Attila invaded the Western Roman Empire, crossing the Rhine early in March 451 and pillaged Western Roman Gaul as far as Cenabum (= Orléans) at the Loire River. There, Attila was stopped in the Battle of the “Catalaunian Plains” in mid-June 451. In 452, Attila invaded Italy, devasted the northern provinces, crossed the Po River, but then returned to his capital before having sacked Mutina (Modena) – without a victory over Aetius but again with rich booty. Attila may have planned the next campaign against the Western Roman Empire to plunder the wealthy cities of Rome and Capua, but he died in the spring of 453 in his Hungarian capital.

“Even serious historians are prone to ponder why exactly Attila is so memorable – why it is, as Adrian Goldsworthy observes, that there have been many barbarian leaders, and yet Attila’s is «one of the few names from antiquity that still prompt instant recognition, putting him alongside the likes of Alexander, Caesar, Cleopatra and Nero. Attila has become the barbarian of the ancient world »” (Dash, 2012).

One reason is his huge footprint. Meier (2020: 470) stresses his “spektakulären Erfolge, die er mehrfach tief in römischen Gebieten errang”. Attila surely was an impressive figure, an exceptional raider who perfected his forefathers’ methods of intimidation and exploitation. He was not an empire-builder, instead he was the “erfolgreichster Beutemacher” of the Huns (Sevin, 1955: 61). Booty was more important to him than land and raiding preferred to trading. He was a true master of the “gift economy” (Kradin, 1995: 26-9). Attila also was “un excellent meneur d’hommes” (Escher & Lebedynsky, 2007: 206). He had a mighty, well-equipped army and knew how to besiege and storm fortified towns. Attila sacked an enormous number of once major European cities, together with his brother Bleda, in 441 Margus (= west of Dubravica), Viminacium (= Kostolac), Singidunum (= Belgrade), Sirmium (the former Roman capital of Illyricum), and in 442 the mighty Naissus (= Niš); then, as the sole ruler of the Huns, in 447 Serdica (= Sofia), Arcadiopolis (= Lüleburgaz) and nearly Byzantium; in 451 Augsburg, Mainz, Köln, Trier, Metz, Verdun, Reims, and nearly Paris and Orléans; finally in 452 the Slovenian Emona (= Ljubljana), the Italian Aquileia, Altinum, Patavium (= Padua), Vicetia (= Vicenza), Verona, Brixia (= Brescia), Bergomum (= Bergamo), Mediolanum (= Milan), Ticinum (= Pavia), Placentia (= Piacenza), Parma, Regium Lepidi (= Reggio Emilia), and nearly Mutina (= Modena). The importance of global cities then significantly differed. In the late 4th century, the Roman Ausonius (310-395) listed the nine great cities of his world. Of these, Attila plundered Aquileia, Trier, and Mediolanum. Carthage, Antioch, and Alexandria were beyond his reach. The last two, Rome and the rich Capua, with the second-largest amphitheatre in the Roman world, were surely on his list for 453. Only one of these major nine ancient cities resisted, namely Constantinople, due to the Theodosian Walls. For the Romans, “Attila était situé tout en haut d’une échelle de dangerosité” (Escher & Lebedynsky, 2007: 207). Or, as Jordanes (Getica, 35.182) expresses it: “He was a man born into the world to shake the nations, the scourge of all lands, who in some way terrified all mankind by the dreadful rumors noised abroad concerning him.”

The other reason for Attila’s fame is the enigma and the many tales surrounding his unexpected death and his lost tomb. Before having achieved his ultimate triumph, to plunder Rome and Capua, Attila died unexpectedly in Hungary, in his early fifties in the presence of his new young wife in the spring of 453. This was shortly after his two most successful raids, the plundering of wealthy northern France and the perhaps even richer northern Italy. From then on, his capital and his tomb with all its riches and his allegedly gold and silver adorned coffins are lost.

Due to ancient Roman, Gallic, and Gothic scholars, several facts about the Huns are known. Gifted archaeologists and able historians have further increased our knowledge. However, the five most important questions regarding Attila and the Huns are still to be answered:

Where is the

native country of the Huns

? From where did they start their conquest? The answer to this question might explain their greed for gold and the merciless persecution of their defectors. Furthermore, it could reveal their specifications for capitals, their burial practices, and their language. The answer will finally end a centuries-old discussion made without data (Chapter 2).

Where are the capitals of

Attila’s royal ancestors

? Where did King Uldin dwell? Where was King Charaton buried? Where is the royal tomb of King Ruga? These capitals are essential because they reflect the development of the Huns in the early 5

th

century and lead the way to the tombs of their rulers (Chapter 3).

Where in 451 did Attila’s important

Battle of the Catalaunian Plains

really take place? Was it indeed near Châlons-en-Champagne (= Catalaunum)? Was it instead at Mauriacus near Troyes? Or, were all the former scholars duped by an unnamed chronicler from 511? Was the decisive battle fought north of Orléans? Should it correctly be called the Battle of Cenabum (Chapter 4)?

Where is

Attila’s capital

? Where is “

the much-disputed position of Attila’s headquarters

”, as questioned by John Man (2005: 141)? An answer is required because it is from here where the hearse to Attila’s tomb started in early 453. Without knowing the location of his capital, no chance exists of ever excavating Attila’s lost tomb (Chapter 5).

Archaeologists, historians, and treasure hunters from around the world still search for his famed grave. Where is

Attila’s lost tomb

? Where are his priceless treasures? Where is the elusive Sword of Mars? Where is the ultimate prize, namely Attila’s corpse, the sole reliable repository of Hunnic DNA (Chapter 6)?

This book offers solutions, or at least hints, for each and every one of these five riddles. Thereby some further enigmas have been unlocked – the identity of the formerly enigmatic Drecon River (Chapter 5.3), the name of the village of Attila’s sister-in-law (Chapter 5.4), the true course of Attila’s Gallic campaign in 451 (Fig. 4.2b) and his Italian campaign in 452 (Fig. 6.3), and finally the unusual place of the Roman Fort Ziridava (Fig. 5.20).

The single most important book on the Huns has been written by J. Otto Maenchen-Helfen (1973): The World of the Huns. Kelly (2008: 30) rightly calls him: “the most authoritative writer of the twentieth century on Hun culture”. The sharpness of his analysis and the richness of his sources make this work unique and still an absolute must for any student of the Huns. As the many citations testify, Maenchen-Helfen compellingly fixed several crucial events, essential dates, and many traits of the Huns. However, progress did not stop in 1973. Peter Heather (1996: 249-56), who revisited and augmented Edward A. Thompson’s important work The Huns, pointed to some errors in Maenchen-Helfen’s publication:

Thompson rightly rejects Hunnic kings prior to 400, because only “

as wealth grew, kingship made its appearance”

. In particular, Maenchen-Helfen accepted the existence of Balamber, who is a mere invention by the Gothic narrator Jordanes (see Chapter 3.2).

Thompson correctly identifies King Ruga’s accession in circa 422 and his death in 434, whereas Maenchen-Helfen’s respective chapter (pages 76-95) is incorrect. This was in part caused by his misassessment of

Chronica Gallica 452

, one of the most complete ancient sources on the Huns (see Chapter 3.2).

In addition, however:

Both authors erred in recognising Marcellinus Comes’ record for 427. The Huns did not conquer Pannonia in 377 and surely were not the masters of Hungary in the early 380s. Therefore, the Romans did not reconquer Pannonia in 427, because they still owned it. In 377, the Huns were the champions of Ukraine. The westward conquest of the Huns was a process over many years in the early 5

th

century. Its stages can be associated with their kings. In contrast to the precise reconstruction in Diculescu (1923) and Sevin (1955), this reliance on Marcellinus Comes fogged Maenchen-Helfen’s and Thompson’s view on the true masters of Hungary in 377, namely the Gepids (see Chapter 2.3). Moreover, it prevented both from recognising the moving capital of the Huns from 400 to 454 (see Chapter 3.4).

Both authors did not seriously attempt to locate the true battlefield of the Catalaunian Plains (see Chapter 4). The location of this battle seems, at first glance, of restricted historical value. Nonetheless, the location matters, “

because, were it to be found, archaeologist could, perhaps, find some evidence of what really happened

” (Man, 2005: 236). This is important because the sole surviving record of this battle, Jordanes’

Getica

, is false in all the essential aspects. Only the reconstruction of this battle can one day answer the question why, despite so many advantages, did Attila not win. And, the correct location is the ultimate test for the credibility of our ancient sources.

Both authors did consider very cursorily, at best, the location of Attila’s capital. Admittedly, Thompson (1945) published a fine report on the features of Attila’s headquarter but not on its location. The location of Attila’s capital is decisive for understanding the development of the Huns and mandatory for locating Attila’s tomb. The tomb with Attila’s DNA is indispensable to learn the true origins of the Huns. This is the sole chance to replace libraries full of fancy theories since the work of De Guignes (1756) with hard scientific facts.

Therefore, the single most important step when studying Attila and the Huns is the painstaking study of every word in Priscus’ travel record to finally locate Attila’s lost capital (Chapter 5). Only the successful search for his headquarter enables us to find Attila’s tomb (Chapter 6). The lack of respective efforts is a clear shortcoming of Thompson’s and Maenchen-Helfen’s work.

In the 21st century, Mischa Meier, has come close to filling this gap. In his opus magnum, Geschichte der Völkerwanderung (2020), Meier masterfully captures all that we know about the Huns. He rightly ignores Balamber, correctly identifies the dates of King Ruga, rejects the misleading 50-year Pannonian record of Marcellinus Comes, and recognises the gradual westward expansion of the Huns. Meier (2020: chapter 2.2.1) elaborates the essence of the Huns, the fact that “Die Hunnenherrscher waren gewissermaßen zum steten Erfolg verdammt”, and the reason for their failure. Overall, there are very few differences in the main assessments, as the many citations verify. Yet, whereas Maenchen-Helfen elegantly circumnavigates the thorny issue of the Catalaunian Plains, Meier is misled by the erroneous location of Troyes. Like Maenchen-Helfen, Meier is unable to identify the Drecon and to locate Attila’s capital. Overall, Meier’s is a fine but far from complete work. None of the above five major questions on the Huns has been resolved.

The dates before Christ are marked BC, all the unmarked dates mean AD. Lengths are given in cm: centimetres, m: metres, and km: kilometres. All the maps are directed Google Maps North, unless otherwise stated. 48.036556, 1.675583 equates to 48°02’11.6”N 1°40’32.1”E. The quotations are mostly presented in their original language. This avoids incomplete translations and tendentious interpretations. Our modern world offers sufficient electronic translation tools. The situation in Europe prior to the arrival of the Huns is dealt with in Chapter 2.3. The history of the Huns, excluding the time of Attila, is presented in Chapter 3.2. The period of Attila is dealt with in Chapter 6.2.2.