A Germanic People Called 'Huns'? by Gunivortus Goos
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
A Germanic People called 'Huns'? By Gunivortus Goos Being a raw and uncorrected translation by the author of his original German text. © Copyright, Gunivortus Goos, 2020. - - - - - - - - - - At times, the human mind can embark on confused and unpaved side paths. I'm no exception on that, and it happened again the other day while enjoying a cup of coffee and a large piece of cheesecake ... For years, I have on different occasions come across a topic every now and then, of which I still do not know very well whether it is something serious and worth giving it a second thought, maybe researching and discussing about it, or to put it definitely aside with a smile. I will give my information below that have been accumulated over the years at my computer (there will probably be a lot more, but because it does not belong to my research projects, I did not research it), and would be happy if someone would like to put their oar in it. Maybe on Facebook on my profile page or in a suitable group or a suitable forum - then please let me know. - - - - - - - - - - Starting question: In addition to the Central Asian horsemen of the Huns and their leader Attila (died 453) from the 4th and 5th centuries, which we know from history and which were one of the causes of the Great Migration wave of Germanic peoples in the 4th century, did also a Germanic people with this name exist, who also had prince called Attila? The collected information: 1. Beda Venerabilis The English monk, scholar and historian Beda Venerabilis (672/3 - 735) wrote in chapter 9 of his "Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum" (Church history of the English people): Eo tempore uenerabilis et cum omni honorificentia nominandus famulus Christi et sacerdos Ecgberct, [...] gentibus euangelizando committere; quarum in Germania plurimas nouerat esse nationes, [...] a uicina gente Brettonum corrupte Garmani nuncupantur. Sunt autem Fresones, Rugini, Danai, Hunni, Antiqui Saxones, Boructuari; ... Translated: At that time the venerable servant of Christ, and priest, Eghert, [...] proposed to himself to do good to many, by taking upon him the apostolical work, and preaching the word of God to some of those nations that had not yet heard it; many of which nations he knew there were in Germany, [...] Such are the Frisons, the Rugins, the Danes, the Huns, the Ancient Saxons, and the Boructuars (or Bructers). All peoples who are said to have lived in the Netherlands and Northern Germany. 2. Widsith In the Old English epic Widsith, two hun(n)ish terms are mentioned, firstly in line 18 Ætla weóld Hûnum, Eormanríc Gotum Translated: Attila ruled the Huns and Ermanarich the Goths Obviously, a Germanic people called Huns is meant here, who lived near the northern coast. And in line 33, where rulers and their peoples are still listed, a prince called Hun is mentioned. Hún Hætwerum and Holen Wròsnum Translated: Hun ruled the Hætweras, Holen the Wrosnas. The 'Hætwere' are sometimes interpreted as a sub-people of the Franks, but which it would be from the known peoples is neither clear nor understandable. Others think it was a sub-population of the Chatti who were presumed to have lived in Lower Saxony at the time. This interpretation also does not go beyond a conjecture. Regarding rulers and peoples the Beowulf epic also mentions similar. 3. Hugas John Haywood (Researcher at Lancaster University) reckons: The Hugas were the inhabitants of the Hugmercki region, that is today's Humsterland, the area around the city of Groningen up to the Sea Lauwers. Elsewhere he explicitly states that this area was in what is now the Dutch province of Groningen and not in Friesland. In other sources the Hugas people are called, or interpreted as 'Huns'. Concerning the region Humsterland… it could lead to confusion here, because on later maps this area was bordered by the Dutch province of Friesland to the east. What is meant in this connection is the area to the west, north and northeast of the city of Groningen, including the northern part of the "Westerkwartier" region. The 'Groningen term 'Ommeland' might have been more appropriate, it means the areas outside the city of Groningen ... this also included the Hugmercki region which apparently was bigger at the time of the Hugas than at a later time. Administrative map of Groningen and Ommelanden before 1795 (French invasion of the Netherlands), on which the internal borders of the districts and sub-districts are shown, as well as an indication of the borders of the former Rheiderland, the most important places and waterways in the 17th and 18th centuries, the coast line of the Dollart in 1520 (largest area), and shows in text some important historical political events. This map only exists in Dutch, if you have a problem to understand terms or a piece of text in the map, just ask me. Source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Staatkundige_kaart_Groningen_en_Ommelanden.png The much older Hugmercki region no longer appears on this map. Yet, the "Friesch Woordenboek" (Frsian Dictionary) (Glossarium Frisicum) by Waling Dijkstra informs: Hugmercki, gouw in Groningerland. (County in the lands of Groningen). Although there is a view of a very small minority, that this Hugmercki would have been located much further south, roughly west of the German city of Münster, yet, this view is not shared here. This divergent view is probably based on (hardly verifiable) geographical information from the Thidrek saga, but the corresponding map based on it has such a poor scale and sizing that it is neither suitable as evidence nor as a reference. The term 'illusion of history' is often used for works such as the Thidreksaga, the Widsith and the Beowulf epic, and this also refers to such geographical indications. Howsoever, the regional location on this is not primarily important for the starting question. 4. Huga-markja The Belgian linguist, name researcher and paleographer Maurits Gysseling writes: The region name Humsterland from Huga-markja-, i.e. the (border) area of the Hugas must come from the Great Migration period. And the Huga-markja connection would imply a previous "Hug(as)". However, the term could also mean: The domain adjoining that of the Hugas. 5. Hunsingo Different opinions exist about the assignment of the Hugas. Some think they were Frisians. This is mostly justified with a passage from the hagiography of the preacher Liudger from 780, where it says: Emperor Charlemagne, who received news of his tireless work, made him a teacher for the Frisians, who lived on the eastern bank of the Lauwers river (Labeci), namely the cantons Hugmerchi, Hunusga, Fivilga, Emisga and Fediritga, as well as the island of Bant. In his "Vita Gregorius", ± 760, Liudger says: the border between the Christian fresones and the heathens lies on the eastern side of the 'Labeki'. (M.G.S. 15.1, p. 71). So it is not said here that those heathens are Friesians, that could have been another people - the Hugas, or Huns perhaps? The old names Hunusga and Fivilga are now called Hunsingo and Fivelgo and are regions in the north of the Dutch province of Groningen. Geographical mentions in epics such as in Widsith and also in Hagiographies should be viewed with great caution, because precise ethnical and geographical indications were not the purpose of such works and it is questionable whether the authors of such works had sufficient knowledge about that at all. 6. Labeci Regarding the river name 'Labeci' (there are several spellings of the name) ... there are researchers who think that this was not the Lauwers but the 'Old IJssel' - today's river IJssel in the Netherlands flows at the city of Kampen into the IJsselmeer (Lake IJssel), but the landscape of the northern half of the Netherlands looked very differently in the expiring Antiquity and Late Antiquity, and the river IJssel is said to have had a different course at that time. It is assumed to have had its origin in the German Münsterland region and its course through the Netherlands could have been continued more northbound than is the case today. The question of a definitive answer on this has not (yet) been solved, but the Lauwers is favored here. The place where the island of Bant was located was long puzzled, today it is assumed that it was a Hallig off the East Frisian coast, which was about halfway between the Ley-bay and the island of Juist. It was inhabited until the end of the 16th century. Today there is only a sandbar left of it. 7. Chauken The aforementioned identification of the Hugas or Huns with the Frisians is certainly neither established nor a no-brainer. it is quite possible that this identification probably was suggested mainly due to the geographical proximity to this people - in addition, during the Frisian heyday, the entire area along the Wadden Sea may have been Frisian ( see above at 5); it is thus plausible that after the Frisian ‚Golden Era‘ apart from the Frisians also other peoples lived there. That is why other researchers, such as the German historian Reinhard Wenskus, see an identification of the Hugas with the Chauci as more likely - these inhabited especially in the first centuries CE the area in the north of the Dutch province of Groningen and the bordering area in Germany - in particular the 'Lesser Chauci' are meant here. This view has existed since Rudolf Much (1862-1936) an Austrian German and Scandinavian medievalist and classical philologist wrote about it. I agree with this view. Based on the 8th century Lex Frisiorum, Mr. L. Ph. V. van den Bergh in his "Handboek der Middel- Nederlandsche Geographie, naar de bronnen bewerkt" (Handbook of the Middle Dutch Geography, adapted from the sources), from 1852 ,writes on page 129: Each of those parts of Friesland contained a few shires, 1st, between the Ems and the Lauwers: Hunsingo, Fivilgo, Humsterland and Middagsterland; ...