Identifying the Huns and the Xiongnu (or Not): Multi-Faceted Implications and Difficulties

Sun, Xumeng

Identifying the Huns and the Xiongnu (or Not): Multi-Faceted Implications and Difficulties

dc.contributor.advisor	Wright, David Curtis
dc.contributor.author	Sun, Xumeng
dc.contributor.committeemember	Barber, Anthony
dc.contributor.committeemember	Konshuh, Courtnay
dc.contributor.committeemember	Chastko, Paul A.
dc.contributor.committeemember	Ferris, John Robert
dc.date	2020-11
dc.date.accessioned	2020-09-17T17:43:03Z
dc.date.available	2020-09-17T17:43:03Z
dc.date.issued	2020-09-14
dc.description.abstract	The origin of the Huns has been a myth since they made the first appearance in the Eastern Europe in the 370s CE. The early Roman and Gothic historians assume they came from the North, “the frozen ocean,” or the East, associated with the Alans. It was not until the eighteenth century that the French Orientalist Joseph de Guignes first proposed from the political perspective that the mysterious Huns came from Northeastern Asia, where the nomadic Xiongnu rose and became the most powerful enemy of Qin and Han dynasties (221 BCE- 220 CE) in China. After defeated by the Chinese and other nomadic groups such as the Xianbei, one part of Xiongnu trekked west and turned out to be the European Huns. This thesis seemingly makes good sense and has thereby attracted a world of followers, who tend to defend the argument from historical, linguistic, or archaeological perspectives, while critics also form a strong case to oppose it. The ongoing debate has been lasting for over two centuries and continues to this day. Much of the existing research focused only on one or two aspects of the problem, but far less on the comprehensive studies for it is indeed a challenging interdisciplinary undertaking. Historians Otto Maenchen-Helfen (1945), David Curtis Wright (1997), and Étienne de la Vaissière (2005) have made inspiring attempts, and this thesis is a continuing effort, combining both the prior research and the most recent archaeological and anthropological achievements. This project investigates the debate not exclusively from one respect but from four perspectives: historical sources, linguistic connections, ethnic origins, and archaeological finds. According to the definition of “ethnic group” in anthropology, this thesis argues it is an oversimplification to identify the Huns with Xiongnu and that it will be a meaningless venture in future discussions if a consensus or common definition about what an ethnic group is cannot be achieved.	en_US
dc.identifier.citation	Sun, X. (2020). Identifying the Huns and the Xiongnu (or Not): Multi-Faceted Implications and Difficulties (Master's thesis, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada). Retrieved from https://prism.ucalgary.ca.	en_US
dc.identifier.doi	http://dx.doi.org/10.11575/PRISM/38211
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/1880/112546
dc.language.iso	eng	en_US
dc.publisher.faculty	Arts	en_US
dc.publisher.institution	University of Calgary	en
dc.rights	University of Calgary graduate students retain copyright ownership and moral rights for their thesis. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission.	en_US
dc.subject	Xiongnu, Huns, identification	en_US
dc.subject.classification	Education--History of	en_US
dc.subject.classification	Literature--Asian	en_US
dc.subject.classification	Economics--History	en_US
dc.subject.classification	History--Ancient	en_US
dc.subject.classification	History--European	en_US
dc.title	Identifying the Huns and the Xiongnu (or Not): Multi-Faceted Implications and Difficulties	en_US
dc.type	master thesis	en_US
thesis.degree.discipline	History	en_US
thesis.degree.grantor	University of Calgary	en_US
thesis.degree.name	Master of Arts (MA)	en_US
ucalgary.item.requestcopy	true	en_US