IBTTKNI. us to ihe trne'sovneignty. Was It Bohun, or Hon? 4ue to the arms of Afetins, or dne to the arms of Attila ? If everything be Hun that was conquered by Aetins and his Huns, the empire of Attih enlarges : if everything be Roman, it decreases. . Ponmoma was Hun — probably in the very widest sense that can be given to the term. Daaa was Han; bat not altogether. This we lesm from Priscns. When he visited the royal village of Attila^oneof the Hon magnates, byname Onegesius, was absent, and had to be waited for. This was becaose he was settling the alfiurs of the Acatziri, who had just come under the dominion of Attila. Now, if the Acatziri be placed (see below) in the more moontainoos parts of Transylvania, a certain portioQ of that province mast be sabtmcted from even the Dacia of Huns. Be it observed, that neither of the authors jost quoted menticMis these TAe Nemi.'^li these were Han stAjeets^ rather than eonfedaraUa^ and if, as is probable [Nburi], they lay around the marshes at the head-waters of the Dnietter, we must make the northern extension of the Hun area veiy irr^ular in outline, since it was narrow in the direction of the Acatziri, but broad in that of the Neari. Perhaps the boundary of the Hub territory in the present parts of Southern finasia followed the line of the rivers. If so, it comprised Bessarabia, Cherson, Taurida, and some- thing more. The Alani who fboght under tiieir king Sangiban at Chfttons were the Alani of the AStian settlements in Gaul, rather than those of the Circassian frontier. Tuning westwards, and changing the direction, we come to some important areas, which must not be too lightly and gratuitously given over to the Huns ; viz. the lands of the Thuringians, Bui^n- dians, Suevi, Alemanni, with parts ^ Rhaetia and Vlndelicia. The districts are large, the occupants powerful, the reign of Attila short. For this period we cannot expect to find absolute evidence of the independence of these several countries. We find them, however, generally speaking, inde- pendent and powerful, both before and afterwards. When Attila died his kingdom broke up ; and one of the measures of the magnitude of Attila's do- minion, ia the magnitude of Uie kingdoms that grew out of it. Three of these were more important than the rest ; a, that of Theodoric the Ostrogoth •, &. that of the Gepidae ; c. the Lombards. Suppose these to have been carved out of the Hun monarchy in all their integrity, and we suppose a vast Hun area. But this was not the case. Theodoric*s kingdom was large, because Italy was added to it At Atti]a*s death it was limited to a portion of Pannonia, and that a moderate-sized portion. The Italian addition was subsequent The Gepidae are the obscnrest of all the populations of Daoo -Pannonia ; the exact ethnological relations being unknown, though the evidence of Prooopius and Jomandes makes them Gtiths. It is more important to remember that their empire was by no accounts a large one. In the reign of Jnstinian it was destroyed by the Lom- bards. The Lombard power, Hlthough generally spoken of as if it grew out of the wreck of Hans, really arose oat of that of the Gepidae, and was later in date than the immediate dissolution of At- tila's dominion. It only became formidable in the reign of Justmian. Odoacer, like Theodoric, was remarkable for what he effected against Borne, xmther than for the magnitude of his kingdom. HUNKL 1093 Bnt whatever may have been the importance of tliese kingdoms, it is a matter of history that the area out of which they grew was limited to Pan- nonia, Western Dacia, Eastern Rhaetia, and Northern Moesia. Hence no inordinate magnitude need be given to the dominion of Attila in order to account for the kingdoms that grew out of its decay. On tiie south of the Danube, a belt of country, five days* journey across, from the Save to Nov! in Thrace, was ceded by the Romans to the Huns. It is submitted that the sovereign sway of Attila was bounded by the eastern frxmtier of Bohemia on the west, and by the Maeotis (there or there* abonts) on the east There was also the strip of bmd to the south of the Danube. The northern boundary was uncertain. It probably reached to Minsk in one part, and no further than the northern part of Transylvania on the other. This is by no means a small area. It is less, however, than the one usually suggested by the name of Attila. TRADiTioiifARy ViBw OP Attila's Power AMD Character. — In thus curtailing the historical dimensions of Attila, the writer has not forgotteti his subsequent reputation, and the space he has filled in the minds of his after- comers. He has not for- gotten the terrible term. Scourge of God. He has recognised the place that Eted takes in the fictions of Germany, and A tla in those of Scandinavia — sharing the Nibelungen-lied and the Edda with Sig- fnd and Theodoric; not less in mythic reputation than Arthnr or Charlemagne. And not in prose and verse only. The tutnuli of Northern Germany are called the Hunengrabe {^^Graves of ike Huns); and the ffundaruck Mountain has, erroneously, been looked upon as the Hill of the Huns, More than this — it is admitted tluit the subsequent reputation is, to some degree, primd facie evidence of a real historical basis. Why shoald the Attila of men's imagination be so much greater than the corresponding Alarics and Genserics, if there was not some difference in their original magnitudes? Such a remark b le- gitimate as criticism. ValecU quantuni. There are reasons why Attila and the Huns should become ex- aggerated — reasons which influenced our early, rea- sons which have influenced our modem, authorities. The halo of fiction around Attila is not of Italian origin, nor yet of Greek. It is Gerwow, and Ger- mano-Gallic; German, essentially and originally. It has already been stated, that the chief source is Jomandes ; in many respects the Geoffroy of Mou-^ mouth to Germany and Scandinavia. Tradition (it is believed), tradition and error have engendered exaggerated notions of Attila's power, and distorted ideas of his peraonal charucter and actions. Whence come the overstatements? The size of a king's dominions may be magnified without the king being made a monster; and, vice versdj a hideous picture may be drawn of a king without nuignifying the size of hts dominions. Whence come the ovcKtatements ? The historian is a Goth. The more nations the Huns conquered, the less the shame to the Goths. Here lay a bounty upon exaggeration — exaggeration which was easy for two reasons : 1. The joint conquests of Aetius might be credited to the Huns exclusively ; 2. Any kingdom of which the king was worsted might be dealt with as abso- lutely conquered, and reduced in its full integrity Let us apply this to one man's dominion only — Hermanric's, accor^&ng to Jomandes. The Huns conquer Hermanric What had Hennanric conqaered ? First cornea a iLt of names difficult to make out — 4 A 3
