|
|
Post by penetratorx on Sept 19, 2005 5:45:21 GMT -5
Is there any real evidence to say what the Huns were racially, I've read that the Romans said they were rather squat and dark but is there any finds of skeletons that would prove exactly what they were or images of them from the time ? Also is there any evidence as to their Language, there seems to be speculation it was probably a uralic-altaic language but again is there any real hard evidence ?  somehow I doubt they looked like Jack Palance seen here on the left as Attila. |
|
|
|
Post by Melnorme on Sept 19, 2005 6:06:34 GMT -5
Coon thought they had a Mongoloid element. I think he presented evidence. So...read the relevant chapter of tRoE.  |
|
|
|
Post by oubit on Sept 19, 2005 7:39:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Mike the Jedi on Sept 19, 2005 7:40:49 GMT -5
That avatar of his is exactly how I would imagine the majority of the Huns to look.
|
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Sept 19, 2005 11:52:10 GMT -5
Well Attila was a dwarf(midget)with slanted eyes,but by the times the Huns reached Europe and threatened the Empire,the majority wouldve took on a more Eurasian to European form,they heavily mixed with Germanics and Slavs.But they where Turkic in origin.
|
|
|
|
Post by Drooperdoo on Sept 19, 2005 12:08:54 GMT -5
In The Races of Europe, Carleton Coon discusses the graves which yielded a wealth of Hunnic specimens. He went into detail. The earliest layer of graves he said was more Asiatic. By the later graves, there were very, very few "Asiatics," most being European mercenaries, Germanic tribesmen and Turkic peoples and Euro-Turkic mixes.
It's questionable even about the numbers of the very earliest Huns as to whether they had large Mongoloid numbers. It appears not--even from the beginning. The majority of their army were people from the steppes, who were predominantly Caucasoid to start off with. Turkic peoples.
I can't remember which one it was Gheghis Khan or Atilla the Hun, but one of them was described as green-eyed and redheaded, while the other was described as being pretty much Mongoloid: Extremely short stature, sparse body hair, a flat face and eyes with the epicanthic fold.
P.S.--It's pretty persuasive that the Huns were basically what we would call Turks when you read up on their language. There's been pretty extensive analysis, and it's clear that they spoke a language remarkably close to modern Turkish. That, more than anything, buoys up the case that the Huns were Turkic. Even today, if you look at people from Turkey and Turmenistan, you see nations that are predominantly Caucasoid but with clear Asiatic phenotypes popping up now and then. "Turkey" is kind of deceptive, since the majority of the people were Indo-European (before the Turks took over), but in Turkmenistan the same truth holds: Caucasoids, with varying degrees of Asiatic admixture. Their president today looks like a Russian--but with Mongolian eyes and Asian-black hair.
|
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Sept 19, 2005 12:17:59 GMT -5
By all accounts Attila was one ulgy SOB...put it this way he certainly did not look the least bit like Gerard Butler,LOL!
|
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Sept 19, 2005 12:23:35 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Sept 19, 2005 12:32:23 GMT -5
I'd say its a good guess of what he wouldve looked like. He was known for his slanted eyes among some other trait. I'am sure he had mongoloid,lappoid or Ladogan admixture in his bloodline.
|
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Sept 19, 2005 13:01:20 GMT -5
Thats your opinion,and it may not be entirley incorrect,as we know, and its been mentioned here that they mixed with local tribes.
However,History and archeology points to a East Asian origin and that they where proto-Mongolian or proto-Turkic nomad tribes from north-eastern China .
By that being the region the Huns originated from and out've,and based on physical description of Attila ect,I say its very like they had partly Mongoloid appearance or characteristics. Therefore a Mongoloid,lappoid or ladogan subracial types wouldn't be unsensible conclusion. Though probably in Attila's day,more so of the elite.
The Roman writer-Historian Priscus gave a physical description of Attila himself:
"short of stature, with a broad chest and a large head; his eyes were small, his beard thin and sprinkled with gray; and he had a flat nose and a swarthy complexion, showing the evidences of his origin."
So its generally been accepted that Attila's physical appearance was most likely that of an Eastern Asian or Mongolian type or mixed type.
|
|
|
|
Post by penetratorx on Sept 19, 2005 13:11:44 GMT -5
according to this pic he looked just like the 1970's British TV character Catweazel who was a Celtic Druid I believe.  Attila  Catweazel |
|
|
|
Post by gee on Sept 19, 2005 13:13:15 GMT -5
in Turkmenistan the same truth holds: Caucasoids, with varying degrees of Asiatic admixture. Their president today looks like a Russian--but with Mongolian eyes and Asian-black hair. Black hair or black hair-dye?    |
|
|
|
Post by Drooperdoo on Sept 19, 2005 13:35:27 GMT -5
Turkmenistan's president uses black hair-dye because his original hair-color was black. Look at his eyebrows.
P.S.--I stand by my description of him as looking like a Russian, with modest Asiatic admixture. He's a big, hulking bear of a man.
Russia itself is fascinating. It stretches over two continents and 100 different races. By the time the Soviet Union fell only 55% of its population was Russian. The rest of the nation was Armenian, Georgian, Turkic, Asiatic, Siberian, etc. The further east you went, the more Mongoloid.
I see no reason why they're not representative of what the Huns looked like. It seems like a pretty logical hypothesis.
|
|
|
|
Post by Crimson Guard on Sept 19, 2005 14:02:37 GMT -5
Most of what we call Russia,the Roman's and Greeks called Sarmatia and Hyperborea.
|
|
|
|
Post by oubit on Sept 19, 2005 14:15:38 GMT -5
"Filimer, king of the Goths ... found among his people certain witches ... he expelled them from the midst of his race and compelled them to wander in solitary exile afar from his army. There the unclean spirits, who beheld them as they wandered through the wilderness, bestowed their embraces upon them and begat this savage race, which dwelt at first in the swamps -- a stunted, foul and puny tribe, scarcely human, and having no language save one which bore but slight resemblance to human speech. Such was the descent of the Huns who came to the country of the Goths... They made their foes flee in horror because their swarthy aspect was fearful, and they had, if I may call it so, a sort of shapeless lump, not a head, with pin-holes rather than eyes."
- Jordanes, Origins and Deeds of the Goths
"At the very moment of their birth the cheeks of their infant children are deeply marked by an iron, in order that the usual vigor of their hair, instead of growing at the proper season, may be withered by the wrinkled scars; and accordingly they grow up without beards, and consequently without any beauty, like eunuchs, though they all have closely knit and strong limbs and plump necks; they are of great size, and bow-legged, so that you might fancy them two-legged beasts, or the stout figures which are hewn out in a rude manner with an axe on the posts at the end of bridges."
- Ammianus Marcellinus, History of Rome from Constantine to Valens
|
|
