|
The Hun! His name conjures up terrifying images of fiendish barbarians, of savage horsemen bringing death and destruction to all and sundry. It is over 1,500 years since Attila led his galloping forces against the mighty Roman empire to prove to everyone that he himself was the greatest warrior of his time - nay, of all time - but his reputation as a bogeyman has outlived the centuries. Why? Was he really such a terrible man? Was he as bad as the myths and legends would have us believe? The man himself made a strong, and not very pleasant, impression on his contemporaries. One Roman historian who visited Attila's stronghold in Wallachia (a region in the south-eastern part of what is now Romania) in AD 449, described the king as a hideous dwarf with broad shoulders, a large head, a flat nose, and a scanty beard. Obviously, the Romans didn't like the Huns. Another historian who saw Attila in person says: 'The haughty step of the king of the Huns expressed the consciousness of his superiority to the rest of mankind, and he had a habit of rolling his eyes fiercely as if he wanted to enjoy the terror he inspired.' The Romans saw him as superstitious and illiterate, which was how they saw most people of the various tribes that they lumped together as 'barbarians'. He was obviously intelligent, though, and had the ability to make men want to follow and obey him. Attila is often compared with another 'world' conqueror, Genghis Khan, the mighty Mongol overlord of the 13th century. This comparison is unfair to the Hun. Genghis encouraged his soldiers to ravage conquered territory and torture prisoners. Attila was not merciless in battle, but he realized the futility of destroying the spoils of war and murdering prisoners who could be used as slaves. He was as ruthless as Genghis Khan in his pursuit of power - there is no doubt that he murdered his brother, Bleda, in 445 after they had ruled jointly for 11 years - but he was quicker than Genghis and other barbarians to learn respect for the more sophisticated peoples whom his armies overran while conquering great sectors of the Roman empire. He even employed Rome-trained officials in his court. And though he eventually finished up in command of a treasure greater than the once-poor Huns could ever have dreamed of, wealth did not go to his head. One Roman commentator who described the conqueror as a 'hideous dwarf' also wrote admiringly about the way he preferred to eat plain food from a wooden plate while his fellow-soldiers gorged themselves on 'dainties' served in silver dishes. No single military force of that time - certainly not the demoralized army of the crumbling Roman empire - could halt Attila's march across northern Europe. Not until Rome joined forces with the Visigoths, another mighty barbarian people, were the swift cavalry and deadly accurate bowmen under Attila's command finally defeated, in 451, at a bloody and decisive battle at Maurica, near what is now Châlon-sur-Marne in north-eastern France. According to legend, Attila then prepared to sacrifice himself on a pyre of burning saddles rather than face capture. After changing his mind he led his army southward and invaded Italy, where for a time they threatened the city of Rome itself. But the Huns were never quite the same, and in 453 the death of Attila, the military genius who had made them what they were, spelled the beginning of a quick end to their whirlwind European adventure. Attila's end at the age of about 47 was as dramatic and strange as any of the events of his lifetime. While still in Italy, he decided to take a new bride (he already had a number of wives), a beautiful young girl named Ildico. After a wine-sodden wedding feast, the happy couple retired to their bedchamber, and nothing was heard of them until late the following day, when, at last suspecting that something might be wrong, attendants made their way into the room. They found Ildico in a state of shock. Attila was lying on his back in a pool of blood, dead, apparently, from an unstoppable nosebleed. Had the pretty young wife murdered him? She was accused of it in some reports, but the Huns themselves seem not to have thought her guilty. Attila was buried in a traditional ceremony by a selected group of horsemen, who were then put to death. (According to legend, they were strapped to their saddles, their throats were cut, and their horses impaled in a ring around the grave, forming a rather gruesome guard of honour for the departed king.) About five centuries after his death, Attila gained the sobriquet by which he is best - or perhaps the word should be 'worst' - known: 'The Scourge of God' (Flagellum Dei), an epithet used for the first time by the Bishop of Modena in a 10th-century Latin account of the Huns' advance through Europe. No doubt the Christians of Europe were terrified by the approach of the Asian hordes, and no doubt the Huns did sack churches during the nineteen years (434-453) of Attila's leadership. We should not forget, however, that everything we know about the Huns comes from Roman and Church historians; and patriotic Romans and fervent Christians all had their motives for picturing Attila as a monstrous enemy of God. The Romans needed someone almost supernaturally evil to blame for the decline of their 'eternal' empire. And Attila's story, including its bloody end, provided the Church with a good cautionary lesson for sinners. Bill Hutchings |
|
page last updated 3 MARCH 2000 |
