Nomadism, Horses and Huns

7/18/2019 Nomadism, Horses and Huns

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/nomadism-horses-and-huns 1/18

The Past and Present Society

Nomadism, Horses and HunsAuthor(s): Rudi Paul LindnerSource: Past & Present, No. 92 (Aug., 1981), pp. 3-19Published by: Oxford University Press on behalf of The Past and Present Society

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/650747Accessed: 17/12/2009 07:13

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=oup.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

Oxford University Press and The Past and Present Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve

and extend access to Past & Present.

http://www.jstor.org

http://www.jstor.org/stable/650747?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=oup

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=oup

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/650747?origin=JSTOR-pdf



NOMADISM,HORSESAND HUNS*There s no need to labour hepoint thattheHuns allbut livedonhorseback, ndin sheerhorsemanshipheyfarsurpassedhe bestRomanandGothiccavalry.

In the seventyyearsbetween hefirstclashof themarauders ithRoman rontiertroops and the battle at the locusMauriacus,he warfareof the Huns remainedessentiallyhe same.Attila'shorsemenwerestillthesamemountedarcherswho inthe 380s hadriddendownthe Vardar alleyandfollowed he standards f Theo-dosius.

WE HAVEALL READ IN SURVEYS AND TEXTBOOKSTHATTHE HUNS WERE

theworstof thebarbarians. rue nomads, heyentered ateantiquityon horseback ndroderoughshodover Europe ornearlya century.They livedon the gallopnorth of the BlackSea,west of the Carpa-thians, south of the Alps, andwest of the Rhine.They weremorethanjust a people on horseback: heywerecentaurs.3

Foryears heseeasygeneralizationsaveappeared, ndhaveevenbecome ntroductory ssumptions,n historiesof thisperiod.A lookat any atlas, however, may lead to the suspicionthat, west of theCarpathians,he topographical,limaticandrangeconditionsdiffer

sharply romthose of the vast InnerAsiansteppe. In this new en-vironment,with its shrunkenresources,could tribes continue anomadicexistence and field a nomadichorde?The answerto thisquestionwill havea decisiveeffecton ourreconstructionf the his-torynot only of the Huns but also of the Avars,Hungarians, hethirteenth-centuryMongols,andtheOttomanoccupation f theBal-kans. Thisessay,frankly,attempts o unhorsemostof theHuns,butevenif theattempt ails, let it leadto a fresh ook atwhatthesourcestell us abouttheHunsandwhatanthropologyells us aboutnomads.

Sincemost of this essay s a search orlargeherdsof horses,a fewwordsabout the significanceof the horse for nomadicsuccessarenecessary.4To begin,we areconcernedwithnomadswhoseoppor-

* Many riendswerekindenough o lookover hisessayandofferhelpful ommentsandcriticism,but they arenot responsibleor my stubbornnessn error.Particularthanksare due to my wifeMolly andmy fatherFrankLindner.I wouldalsolike tothankProfessorsClive Foss, JonathanMarwil,JosephFletcher,JohnFine, JohnEadie,WalterGoffartandJeffreyBale. I wrotethis essay for Professors ohnandGraceSmith,patient eachers,generousriends,artfulhorse-drovers.

1 E. A. Thompson,A History fAttilaandtheHuns Oxford, 948), p. 5I.

2 0. Maenchen-Helfen, heWorld f theHuns Berkeley, 973), p. 20I.

3 Claudian,n Rufinum,. 329-30 (ed. H. L. Levy,Geneva, 935, p. 73): "Nordid

a dualnaturebetter itthebiform entaurs o thehorsesofwhich heywerea part necplusnubxgenasuplexnatura iformesognatisptavit quis)".4 Themost nfluentialmodern tudyof anomadicribe s F. Barth,Nomads fSouth

Persla Oslo, I96I). For morerecent rends,seeEquipeecologie t anthropologieessocietespastorales, astoralProductionndSocietyCambridge,979), andforhistor-ians'use of anthropologicaliterature,ee J. M. SmithJr.,"Turanian omadism ndIranlall PolltlCS"? [rAnlAtl StUdles, Xi (I978), pp. 57-8I.



4 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 92

tunities were superior o those of modernpastoralists,whom aerialreconnaissance as deprivedof the militaryand politicaladvantage

of surprise.That advantage llowedthe pastoralnomadto derivealivelihoodnot only from his herdsbut also, if a suitableopportunityappearedor was forced on him, by raidinghis settled neighbours.The suitabilityof the opportunitywas often a functionof the termsof trade: plunder could be a responsenot only to a government'sattemptto impose its authorityover the herders,but also a way ofloweringperceivedhigh pricesof grain, or an artificialmeansof ob-taininga betterprice for one's own surplusanimalsat market. f thenomadcould not strike a satisfactory argainwith the settled mer-

chant or farmer, raiding allowed him to complete the transactionprofitably.Whether he termsof trade ed to commerce r to warfare("one-sidedeconomicexchanges")depended,then, not only uponthe relativepricesof grainandanimalsbut alsouponthe relative ostsof raiding casualties, ll will). Now in recent imes, since the powerof centralgovernments ossessingaircraft as restricted aiding,pas-toralistsmust trade animalsor animalproducts or grainand othergoods which the pastoral ycle does not provide.In the middleages,however, he militarypotentialof nomadswas far superior o thatofruralpeasantsand villagers,and so nomadscould rely on predationand extortion o supplementor even whollyto supplantpastoralismand trade.

In order o recognize he basesof thatnomadicmilitary uperioritywe must furtherdistinguish he nomad romthe simpleherder.Theherder s a pastoralistwhose life revolvesaround he welfareof hisflocks. He needs pasture,waterand occasionalmarkets. n our ownday, whenpopulation ndgovernmental ressure aveexpanded ul-tivationand restricted ange ands,pastoralists etaincustomary as-tureson which they grazetheir herds. Centuries go therewere few

constraints n tribalmovements) nd if one set of pastureswas over-grazedor sufferedpoorrainfall, he herdsman ouldsearch or green-er pastures lsewhere.His family'swelfaredepended, hen, solelyonthe satisfaction f the needs of his herd of sheep and goats. To addpredation o his repertoire,however, to become a nomadwith thepoliticaland military hreatsand advantagesmplied n the term, heneeded he horse. The horsegavehim speed, rangeandmobility.Hecould choose the place and time for battle, ambushhis prey, andescape o the steppe n shortorder.Infantry r stall-fed avalry orses

could find him only if they had a large commissary nd the searchdid not take too long. To developthese advantages he nomadkeptnot one horsebut stringsof them, affording im fresh,quickmountson demand.A stringof horseswas alsoan inexpensive ddition o thenomad'sequipment,for the horses could freely graze on the open



NOMADISM, HORSES AND HUNS 5

steppe.5Thus, as long as therewereenoughhorsesand sufficientpasture, henomadic ifepromisedadventure ndwealth o thepas-

toralistandthreatened onfiscation nd dominationo settlers.The readermaynowperceivewhy the fateof the Hunsas a force

was boundup withthefateof theirhorses.Extant cholarshipn theHuns, however,assumes hatthe Huns alwayshadhorsesandthatthey usuallyhad enoughhorses to enforcetheirthreats,no matterwherethey happenedto be.6 There are two waysof testingtheseassumptions.First, and most crucial,is to ask how apparentandinfluential rehorses n the sourceswhichreveal heHunstous; thatis, arethe sources n anywayappreciative f the nomadiccharacter

of the Huns(in the manner,say, of the European hroniclers f theMongolraids)?Secondly,what canwe suggestaboutthe actualca-pacityof the Huns' Europeanhomes to support argenumbersofhorses?

Performinghefirsttestis a straightforwardaskof exegesis.Whatdo the sourcesactuallydepict,wherelaterscholarshaveseenHunson horseback?Werehorsespresentand if so whatroledidthey play?Werethey decisive?This approachmaystrike the readeras inade-quateon twocounts.First,wehaverelativelyew literary ources or

thehistoryof theHuns, andamong hem we haveno rightto expect

an authorcognizantof ourneeds. The secondobjection ollows romtherealizationhatnoneof the sourcesevennoteswhether heHunsherdedsheep.7How, then, can we dareto buildan edificeon thebasisof laconic,scatteredexts?There sa clearandsensible esponseto suchobjections.We canremedyneither henaturenorthenumberof thesources;we canonlydealwithwhatwe have.Further, t mustbe borne n mindthatwe areseekingsomethingout of the ordinaryken of late antiqueauthors,something hat wouldarrest heiratten-tionand excite theircomment.Shepherdsandtheirflockswereno

novelty,butlargenumbersof mountedarchersromthesteppewerenot everydayBalkan phenomena.The speed, skill and successofmountednomads n warfarehaveexcitedcomment romsedentaryobservers hroughouthistory.Chronicle ntries aboutthe Mongolsrender t likelythat,when enemyhorsesplayeda decisiverole,thoseresponsibleorrecording he eventstooknoteof it.8

We beginwiththe famousdescription f the Huns by Ammianus

5 J. E. Wiita,"TheEthnikan ByzantineMilitaryTreatises"Univ.of MinnesotaPh.D. thesis, I977), p. I44.

6 I am in this sense criticalof the workof E. A. Thompsonand the late OttoMaenchen-Helfen,ut I wouldlike to acknowledgemy greatdebt to thesescholarsfor theirexcitingand stimulatingbookson the Huns. Thompsonwrotebeforethefloodof ethnographiciterature n nomadic ocieties,andMaenchen-Helfenidnotliveto completehiswork.

7 Maenchen-Helfen,WorldftheHuns,.I7I.

8 D. Sinor,"HorseandPasturen InnerAsianHistory",Oriensxtremus,ix I972),

p. I82 n. 50.




Marcellinus.The steppenorthof the BlackSeahas always urnisheddecent pasture n abundance,and so it is no surprise o find Am-

mianus'sHuns on horseback.They weremobile,quickandeffective.Their pastoralactivities,migrationas opposedto campaigning, idnot prevent their families from travelling n wagons, where theiryoungsters rew o pubertyandtheirwomenfolk ashioned lothing.As a vehicleof pastoralists, he wagonalso appears n the historiesofthe Scythiansand the Mongols: n I253 Williamof Rubruckmeas-ured the width between the wheel tracksof such a cart.10Cartsorwagons, however,had no place in a military orce whose advantagelay in mobility, speed and surprise.Indeed Philip of AlacedonandAlexander he Greathad forbidden heir use to their troops.1lThenomadssolved this problemeasily. While on campaign hey left thewagonsandother mpedimenta ehindandtookto theirhorsesalone,for maximumrange and mobility. Wagonsplayed no role in theirstrategy.Ammianus'sHuns were mountedpastoralnomads,readyto rush off at a moment'snotice, leaving the herds behind in thecapablehandsof the womenandchildren:"theyare ightlyequippedfor swiftnessand surprise"12

When we next meet the Huns, they have crossed he Carpathiansand become subject to a differentclimaticregime, a more broken

terrain,a smallerplain, anda ground over ncreasingly istinct romthe steppegrasslands.We learn hat n 384 Hun auxiliaries dvancedas faras Gaulbut, despite he assumptions f latercommentators,hetext itself does not mention horses, horsemenor the speed of theHuns.13In 388 TheodosiusI defeatedMaximuson the Save and,

9 AmmianusMarcellinus, xxi, 2 (ed. W. Seyfarth, vols., Leipzig, 978, ii, pp.

I6I-6). Ammianus'sdescription erved as a model for the generalobservations fZosimus, v. 20 (ed. F. Paschoud,3 vols., Paris, I97I-9, ii pt. 2, pp. 280-2), andJordanes,Getica, xiv. I28 (ed. T. Mommsen,Monumenta ermaniae istoricahere-afterM.G.H.], Auctoresantiquissimi hereafterA.A.], I5 vols., Berlin,I877-I9I5,

v pt. I). The relationship f Ammianus's ext to PompeiusTrogus, discussedbyMaenchen-Helfen,World f theHuns,pp. I3-I4, does not affect he argument ereslncewe will be concernedwith eventswest, not east, of the Carpathians.

10C. Dawson ed.), TheMongolMission London, 955), p. 94; S. Jagchid nd P.Hyer,Mongolia's ulture ndSociety Boulder, 979), pp. 59-6I.

11 D. W. Engels,AlexanderheGreat nd heLogistics f theMacedonian rmy Ber-keley, I978), pp. I2-I3, I5, I6 n. I8.

12 Ammianus, xxi. 2. 8 (ed. Seyfarth, i, pp. I62-3). Maenchen-Helfen,World ftheHuns,pp. 2I5-I9, gathers he texts and archaeologicalvidence or wagons.Heargues hat the Huns needed wagonsto removebooty, although he wagonswere"light, probably wo-wheeledwains" p. 2I5). I believethat he underestimatesheneed for nomads o preserve heirmobilityat all timesand that he overestimateshestabilityof a two-wheeled ehicle drivenat any speed over ancient racks.Wagonsmake t difficult o set up an ambushquickly, o lure an opposing orceafteryou bya rapid, eigned etreat; hey imltthe choiceof routes,and heydelayyourdeparture.As for booty, nomadsdo not need or desire arge,weightyobjects,but prefereasilyportable ourcesof value such as coins or preciousmetals. In the men's absencewomenand childrenoften tend the herds:Barth,Nomads f SouthPersia, p. I4-I6.

13 Maenchen-Helfen,World f theHuns,pp. 40-4, discusses he eventsunder herubric"HunnicHorsemenRide to Gaul".The campaigns discussed n a letterof St.Ambrose,Epistulae,vi. 30. 8 (ed. O. Faller, Corpusscriptorum cclesiasticorumlatinorum hereafterC.S.E.L.], lxxxiipt. I, Vienna, 968, p. 2I2).




although he text againsaysnothingaboutthe Huns'horses,com-mentatorshave arguedfor their importance:Huns were present,

Theodosius eemsto havebroughtcavalry long,theHun auxiliariesmust havebeen mounted(because hey wereHuns), so the Huns'horsemenwon the battle. 4 If we staycloseto the sources,however,thenatureof the Huns'contributiono thevictory emainsunknown.It is suspicious hatthe sourcesaresilentabouthorsemenasnumer-ous, powerfuland hithertounknown,as modernhistorianswouldhavethem.

Referring o eventsof the early3gos, Claudiandeliveredhis firstinvectiveagainstRufinusn 396.It contained n accountof Rufinus'sHunmercenarieswhichemphasizedheHuns' skilledhorsemanship.Thispassage,however, s no proofof thepowerof the Huns'horsesin 392, not leastbecause t is a precisof Ammianus'sdescription.15We mustread he passagen context: ts accuracy uffers romClau-dian's ransparentesire omagnify he oddsagainsthis heroStilicho.More hanthat,it is a smallsetpiece,a gemseparatedrom heeventsand actionsClaudiannarrates.Claudian's wntale doesnot containaccounts of the Huns' horsemanship;mentionof the presenceofHuns simply presentsClaudianwith the occasionfor an excursusliftedfromhis reading.Nothingabout heHuns'actionsn 392 seems

tohavecaughthisattention rdeserveddescription sworthyof note.What mpressedClaudianwasthatAmmianus adsomechoicewordson the subject. Had Claudianmade the swift Huns a partof hisnarrative,he passagewould be telling;as it is, the lines revealClau-dian'smind, not the Huns' horses.

Our next encounterwith horsemen s in 395. Otto Maenchen-Helfenheld thatthesewere Goths,not Huns,but thetext is instruc-tivein eithercase.TheLife of St. Hypatiusnformsus thatthesaint'sfollowerseasily fended off some horsemenwho approachedheir

Thraciansanctuary.There were few horsemen,for a blow fromasingle stone repulsedthem. The Goths, havingdismounted,thenattackedon foot. Theyhadnot triedto utilizetheirhorses o advan-tageto lure the monksinto the open. The storywouldbe peculiarevidence o advance or thepowerfulpresenceof nomadwarriors.6

14Thompson,History f AttilaandtheHuns,p. 32- Maenchen-Helfen,WorldftheHuns,p.I0, on Theodosius's avalry; anegyriciatini,xii (ii).32.4 (ed.E. Galletier,3 vols., Paris,I949-55, iil, pp. 98-9, andcf. p. I02 n. I).

15 ClaUdlaIl,itlRUfitlUt,i.323-3I (ed.Levy,pp. 72-3)jO. Maenchen-Helfen,"TheDate of AmmianusMarcellinus'LastBooks",Amer.Zl.Philology,xxix (I955), p.

394. My commentsaboutClaudianalso applyto SidoniusApollinaris,Carmen,i

239-69 (ed.A. Loyen,3 vols.,Paris, 960-70, i, pp. I3-I4), modelled n Claudianndservinga similarpurpose:O. Maenchen-Helfen,Hunsand Hsiung-nu",Byzantion,XVii (I944-5), p.234.

16 Thompson,History f AttilaandtheHuns,pp.36-7- Maenchen-Helfen,WorldftheHuns?.53; Callinicus,VitaHypatii, i. 2 (ed.G. J. M. Bartelink,Paris, 97I, pp.

92-3); tbtd.,m. I I (pp. 82-4),alsoadducedbycommentators,oesnotmentionhorse-men. I take the terms"Goth"and "Hun"here to denotepoliticaloyalty,not "eth-nicity"; hopeto discuss he distinction lsewhere.




Although he Huns may not have raided he Balkansduring395,they did raidMesopotamia nd Syria rom he northduring hatyear.

Two letters of St. Jeromerefer to their horses and horsemanship.The first, composed n 396, is basedon AmmianusMarcellinus ndwronglytakes the small size and motley appearance f the steppeponyas proofof its inability o prevailoverthe stall-fedRomanchar-ger.17The second, from 399, commentsupon the Huns' speed andmobility. 8Jeromewas describinghorsemen romthe steppe,wherepasture was plentiful. Since the pastures of northern Syria andMesopotamiaould support ome 32s,000 horse or the Mongolcam-paignof I299- 300, andthesepastureswerenot as richas theirnormal

pastures n Azerbaijan nd the Mughan teppefurther o the north,it is no surprise o find FIunnic orsemen n numbers o the east. Butthis does not imply a similar ituation or the west.19

One hint of the Huns' militaryadaptation o European eograph-ical conditionsappearsat the turn of the century. We find BishopTheotimusof Tomis wardingoff a Hun's attemptto rope him in.The passage,from Sozomen, does not inform us if the Hun had ahorse, but it does note that he was leaning on his shield, as wascustomary or Huns in conference r discussion.0Maenchen-Helfen

attempted calculation f the size of sucha shieldandconcluded hatit was "not suitable or war on horseback''.21 n the other hand itwould have been eminently uitable or an infantryman.Continuingour searchwe read that in April 406 Stilichoand Uldin's Huns de-feated the Gothsof Radagaisus t Faesulae.Although he victory soccasionally redited o the cavalryof the Huns, there s not a horseto be found in any of the sources or this encounter.22n brief, thesources which describe the Huns' doings west of the Carpathians

17 Jerome,Epistulae, x. I6-I7 (ed. J. Labourt, vols., Paris, I949-63, iii, pp.

I06-8), contrasting aballus o equas,Maenchen-Helfen, Dateof AmmianusMarcel-linus'Last Books",pp. 39I-2.

18 Jerome,Epistulae,X-YVii. 8 (ed. Labourt, v, pp. 48-9); Maenchen-Helfen,Dateof AmmianusMarcellinus' astBooks",p. 393.

19The sources ist thirteen umen ssigned o the campaign, nd a tumen onsistedof a divisionof ten thousandhorsemen.However, or this campaign he Mongolscalled up only five men in ten, so there were only 6s,ooo men present. For thiscampaign achsoldierwasto reportwith five horses:J. M. SmithJr., "MongolMan-powerand PersianPopulation",TI.Econ.andSocialHist. of theOrzent, viii (I975),pp. 276, 280. The Mongolsestimated n advance he numberof horsesthey couldpasture; his string of five horsesper Mongolwas smaller han usual, owing to thelesserresources f waterand pasture n southernSyria.

20 Sozomen, ii. 26. 8 (ed. J. BidezandG. C. Hansen,Die griechischenhristlichenSchriftsteller er erstenJahrhunderte,, Berlin, Ig60, p. 342), elsewhere, t vii. 26.6-9 (pp. 34I-2), Sozomenwritesof Theotimus's orses,but not of the Huns

2t Maenchen-Helfen,World f theHuns,p. 254.22 Thompson,History fAttilaand heHuns,p. 33, andcf. Maenchen-Helfen,World

of theHuns, p. 60, who omits the horses;Zosimus,v. 26. 4 (ed. L. Mendelssohn,Leipzig,I887, p. 249);Orosius, ii. 37. I6 (ed. K. Zangemeister, .S.E.L., v, Vienna,I882, p. 542);Marcellinus omes,adannum 06. 3 (ed. T. Monlmsen,M.G.H., A.A.xi, p. 69); Chronicle f 452 (M.G.H., A.A., ix, p. 652, entry52).




beginto offer a verydifferentpicturefrom that of the Huns to theeast. The horsesandhorsemenwhosespeed andmobilitysurprised

Ammianus ndJeromeareabsent,oratmost,unimpressivennum-bers andimportancen thewesternauthors' yes.

Onegenerationater,during henegotiationsor thePeaceof Mar-gus, we find Bledaand Attilanegotiatingon horseback,while theRomanemissaries,"mindfulof their dignity",followedsuit.23Itseemsto me that thispassage,unconsciously tretched,hasbecomea proof text for the eternalnomadismof Hun society. SinceAm-mianushad the Huns living on horseback,24nd sinceboth BledaandAttila nsistedon remainingmountedduring hetalks, theHuns

therefore tilldid everything lse on horseback;hey alsohadmanyhorses,andso theirsociety andarmywerestill nomadic.To arguetheseconclusions rom a simpleattempt o humiliate heRomans sunwarranted. tmostwemight nfer hatthechiefsof theHunsrodehorsesandwantedthe Romans o understandhattheyrecognizedthevalue of thosehorses.Muchmorethanthatcannotbe advancedwithouta textdescribingmanyHunsriding o battleandusingtheirhorsemanship o confoundtheiropponents;but there is somethingcuriousabout hosebattlesbetweenHunsandRomanswhentheydo

occur. Given the historicalexperienceof mountednomadarchersagainstarmiesrecruited rom a sedentarypopulation,we shouldex-pect the Huns' Europeanmilitarycareer o havebeen strikingandsuccessful.Ourexpectationswould soonbe dashed.When,duringthe 440s, we do find the Huns battlingRomanarmies,the sourcesforceus to conclude hatthe Hunswerenot superior:heirvictorieswere fewandpyrrhic.25

Thislastpointhasbeenobscuredby aconfusionbetweenpredatoryraids,againstwhichonlyminor ocalopposition ppeared, ndactualbattles n whichthe Romanschose to

opposean armyto the Huns.The formerwereoftensuccessful ortheHuns, but sometimes vena raidbroughtunfortunate esults.Afterthe Huns'siegeof Asemusfailed, the men of the fort were able to ambushand drive off theHuns. 6 It is difficult oexplainhowthesedentaryortress-guardiansof Asemuscouldsurprisea massof mountednomads.Indeed,with-

23 Priscus,frag. I (ed. C. Muller,Fragmenta istoricorumraecorumhereafterF.H.G.], 5 vols., Paris, 84I-70, iV, p. 72).

24 Maenchen-Helfen,World f theHuns,p. I4, discussesAmmianus'smbroideryof his sourceat thispoint n thenarrative.

25 In 44I theHunswereable to raidalmostatwill, buttherewas no Romanarmypresentooppose hem:Maenchen-Helfen,World ftheHuns,p. I I 7. In447thebattleattheUtuscostAttiladearly:Thompson,Histoty fAttilaand heHuns,pp.92-3.Onereasonwhy nomadsholdmobilityso dear s that it allows hemto avoidcostly,un-certainpitchedbattlessuchas this one. The Romancommandert the Utuswasonhorseback,butthesourcesdo notmention henumber,nfluence,orevenpresenceofHunnichorse.Jordanes,Romana, ccxxxi ed. T. Mommsen,M.G.H., A.A., v pt.I); MarcellinusComes,adannum 47. 7 (M.G.H.,A.A., xi, p. 82).

26 Priscus, rag. 5 (F.H.G., iv, p. 75).



IO PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 92

out adequate orage or theirhorses,wouldnomadsbe ableto besiegea fortress n the first place?The nomadscould build siege engines,

or conscriptmen to construct hem,withoutmuchdifficulty.Feedingstringsof horses, however,for any length of time in one placewas,for nomads, next to impossible. The story of the siege of Asemusimplies hat the armyof the Huns was no longera mountedhorde.

In 449 the chroniclerPriscusaccompanied Romanembassy oAttila, and his commentssuggest that the Huns viewed themselvesno longer in nomadic terms. At no point in what remainsof hisaccountdid Priscuscommenton the stringsof horseswhich distin-guishedmedievalnomadarmies rom heirsettledadversaries.27ur-

ther, he noted that Attila ived in a town gracedby well-constructedwoodendwellingsand a stone bath-house uilt alongRoman ines.28The town and its trappingswere more than a fortifiedcorral; hebath-housemay havebeen simplya symbolof prestige,but the pres-tige now sought by the Huns was defined n settled, not pastoral,terms.This prestigearose roman admiration f sedentary lory,notthe gloryaccruing o a chiefwhoprovided ndprotected ichpasturesfor his tribesmen.29 he Huns were adoptinga sedentary deology.In return or the rareobjectswhich the Romanspresented o Attila,he had them given somehorses, but on the return ourney ne of hislieutenantsdemanded he returnof his gift. Priscuscould find noreason or his behaviour,but we mayask whetherhe thought he gifttoo valuable;had he perhaps ewerhorses hanhe could spare?30

Forthosewhopersist n viewingAttila'sHunsas mountednomads,the Gaulcampaign f 45I andthe battleof the locusMaurtacusresentdifficulties, mainly because Attila's "nomads"received a soundthrashing romAetius's"verymotleyhost''.31Althoughmanychron-icles mention the battle, only Jordaneshas left us a full account.32Here are the telling points:both armies oughtto gain the crestof a

27 See the remarksof Sinor, "Horse and Pasture n Inner Asian History",pp.I72-3.

28 Priscus,frag. 8 (F.H.G., iv, pp. 85, 89); Jordanes,Getica,xxxiv. I78-9. In afashion ypicalfor a nomadchief on the verge of settlement,Attila sited his townwithoutdue regard or the availability f buildingmaterials. n the thirteenth enturythe Mongolcity of Karakorumuffered romthe samedeficiencyn planning.

29 I wouldargue urther hatAttila'sHuns ived rompredation ndextortion atherthan from pastoralism.Calculations asedon Roman ributealone yield an incomesufficient o provision largepopulation.This helpsus to understand hy one of theloyalHuns whomPriscusmet was an ex-Romanmerchant. hope to publishsoon alongerstudydevoted o the tribal mplications f Attila's xtortion nd ts impactonthe personnel f the tribe.

30 Priscus, rags.8, I4 (F.H.G., iv, pp. 94, 98).31 Thompson,Histowof AttilaandtheHuns,p. I39.

32 Hydatius,Chroniqueed. A. Tranoy, vols., Paris, 974, i, pp. I46, I48)- Cas-siodorus,ch. I253 (M.G.H., A.A., xi, p. I57); Consulariatalica, ad annum 5I

(M.G.H., A.A., ix, pp. 30I-2)- Gregory f Tours, HistoriaFrancorum,i. 7 (ed. B.Krusch,M.G.H., Scriptores erumMerovingicarum, vols., Berlinand HanoverI884-I937, i); ChronicaGallica M.G.H., A.A., ix, p. 663)- Prosper,ad annum5I

(M.G.H., A.A., ix, pp. 48I-2); Jordanes,Getica,xxxviii.I97-X1. 2I3.



NOMADISM, HORSES AND HUNS I I

hill; muchof the fightingwashand-to-hand ombat, eavingheavycasualties tilluntendedonthenightfollowing he battle;whenAttila

was forcedto retreat,he soughtrefugein his campsurrounded ywagonsand, fearing hathe couldnot escape,preparedo immolatehimself on a heap of saddles.All these arereminiscentof infantrybattles(or of infantrywith minorcavalryassistance).Nomadspre-ferred o fight n theopen where heirhorsesheld thebestadvantage,where heycould oosearrowsat theenemy romasafedistance,andtheysoughttheheightsonlybefore hecontest,when thepossibilityof ambushing he adversarymight be present.Once defeated,en-closingthemselves n a confinedareaand hemming n theirhorses

was a pooralternativeo a rapidflight,whichmight stringout thepursuingenemyandallowa wheeling lankassault.33Besidesthesetacticalconsiderations, n ecologicalpoint presents tself: the battletook placein the heatof earlyJuly. Nomads did not committheirhorses to a campaignafterthe best foragehad alreadyyellowed.34Finally, the funeral pyre of saddleswhich Attila laid for himselfwithin hecircleof thelaager s proofnotthathe hadmanyhorsemenbut that he led too few. Whatlittle we can extractfromJordanesabout hebattle eaves ittledoubtthatAttila's orcecontained ofew

horsemenasto dictatea strategybasedon aninfantry ncounter.The defeatandlossof men in 45 I broughtAttila's eadershipntoquestion. A tribalchief's power,the assurance hat his commandswill be obeyed, restsuponhis success n serving he interestsof histribesmen.Even before45I Attilahadworriedaboutrivalswithinthe tribe;his secretaries ept a list of those of themwhohadfledtothe Romans.Manywerekinsmenwhomight return o opposehim,andAttilanever ost anopportunityo demand heirreturn.In 452,afterhe had led the tribeto defeatin Gaul,Attilahadto deliveravictory and tsaccompanyingooty)sothathiscontinuedeadershipmightbe assured.The Italiancampaign s best understoodas theresultof suchtribalpolitics. 5It isagain nterestingo notethatAttilaenteredItaly in summer, when the pasture(suchas was available)wasevenpoorer han t hadbeen in morenortherlyGaulat thesame

33 Thefortified amporlaagerappears ccasionallyn thehistoriesof InnerAsiantribes; orexample, heMongolscalledsuch a defensivearrangementkuriyen. s atacticaldevice, however,the fortifiedcampwas far inferior o mountedwarfare'sfeignedretreat,orwhichnomadsweremuchbetterprepared. or aTimuridortifiedcamp(which ailedto achieve ts purpose), ee J. E. Woods,TheAqQuyunluMin-neapolis ndChicago, 976), p. I I2.

34 Sinor,"HorseandPasture n InnerAsianHistory",p. I82.35 Barth,Nomadsof SouthPersia,pp. 84-go,presentsa succinctaccountof the

formation nddissolution fpoliticaloyaltieswithina tribe. SeealsoW. Irons,"No-madismas a PoliticalAdaptation: heCaseof theYomutTurkmen"Amer.Ethnol-ogist, (I974), pp. 635-58, andM. Fried, TheNotionof Tribe MenioPark,Calif.I975), pp. 99-I05, whichbothdevelop n differentwaysthedefinition f a tribeasapolitical,as opposedto an "ethnic",phenomenon.On deserters,cf. Wiita,"TheEthnikan ByzantineMilitaryTreatises", p. I58-9.



I2 PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 92

time n 45I .36A nomadichorsemanwouldnot make he samepastoralmistake wice, but a leaderwhose forcesweremostly nfantrywould

not be concernedwith the conditionof the grass. In the event, onlyone sourcefor this expeditionmentionshorses. A sermondeliveredafter he siegeof Milan mplies hatsomeMilanesewereable o escapethe city because he Huns' horsesbore theirbooty-ladenwagons ooslowlyto catchthem.37 f this however s the importof the text, it isa commenton the sedentarizationf Hun strategyand taste n plun-der, the lack of horses n sufficientnumbers o preserve he nomads'mobile advantage,and in fact the transformationf their army ntoan infantry orceaidedby a lessercavalrywing and transport orps.

The final text in our series is the veterinary reatiseof Vegetius,composed n the mid-fifthcentury.38Vegetiuspointedout that thehorseof the Huns was bredfor the steppe,a differentbreed romthestall-fedRomanhorse. Those who saw fit to treata Romanhorseasif it were a steppe pony, for exampleby allowing t to grazeyear-round, only brought ill health to their horse and probable oss tothemselves.Eachhorsehad been bredto fit certain onditions;with-out satisfying hose conditions t suffered.39 egetiusmighthavehadsimilaradvicefor those Huns who brought heirhorsesand herding

practices nto centralor southernEuropeand did not attend o theiranimalsas the Romansdid to theirs. But the occupation f an areawith sucha differentgeographywould anddid) forcea choice:eitherfewerhorsesor a large,trained orpsof stablehandshandling hugegraincommissary or campaigns,and we cannotsee the latter n oursources although t is the practice or raisinghorses n modernHun-gary).40

So farwe haveexamined he writtensourceswhichseemed o bearon the Huns and their horses. There is archaeological videnceaswell.41Some of the excavatedburialsare almostcertainlyof Huns,

36 Maenchen-Helfen,World f theHuns,pp. I 34-5.37 The text and its interpretationre discussedby Maenchen-Helfen,World f the

Huns, p. I39; for the contextof the passage, ee a homilyattributed o Maximus fTurin(Patrologiaeursuscompletus, d J.-P. Migne, Series atina, vii, Paris,I853,

col. 47I)-38 Vegetius,Digestorumrtismalomedicinaeibre ed. E. Lommatzsch, eipzig, 903,

pp. 95-6, 249-52); f. Maenchen-Helfen,World f theHuns, . 204. Vegetius ommentson the character f the horses, but neveron their numbers. t is usefulto have hiscomment p. 96) demonstratinghat the Huns' horses ived by grazingalone. OnVegetius,now see W. Goffart,"The Date and Purpose f Vegetius'De Re Militari",Traditio, xxiii (I977), pp. 65-I00.

39 This lessonalso holdstruefor otherpastoral nimals, ee A. HjortandG. Dahl,

HavingHerds Stockholm, 976).40 L. Foldes (ed.), Viehzucht ndHirtenlebenn OstmitteleuropaBudapest, 96I),

especially he remarks y I. Baloghon pp. 47I-2, 486-7; E. Fel andT. Hofer,ProperPeasants Chicago, 969), p. 46.

41 Maenchen-Helfen,World f theHuns, providesan extensivereviewof this evi-denceas well as the earlier iterature.As far as animal indsareconcerned, ll earlierwork s now superseded y the extraordinaryccomplishmentf S. Bokonyi,Historyof DomesticMammalsn Central ndEasternEurope Budapest, 974).



NOMADISM, HORSES AND HUNS I3

and some of them containclear evidencethat the deceasedkepthorses.As for horsesthemselves, t "is interesting hatnot a single

usablehorsebonehas beenfound n the territory f thewholeempireof the Huns".42Let us assume,however,that somewill turn up induecourse.The presenceof horsesamong he Huns is not at issue;the crux of the problem s the presenceof largenumbersof horses,numbers uitable or sustaining nomadic ife and ensuring hemo-bility, speedandrangeofa nomadichorde.Thoseburialswhichhavereceivedinvestigationcontain almost exclusivelypersonsof highstatusor greatwealth;theirgravegoods may reflect he aspirationsof manyHuns, but they do not, and certainlynot in theirpresent

numbers,mirror he life of most Huns. Lookingat a parallel romAnglo-Saxon rchaeology,we can affirm hat not all of Raedwald'ssubjects,nor even many, lived as he did or wereaccompaniedoeternityby gravegoods such as those found at SuttonHoo. Thearchaeological vidence may some day confirmthe existenceofmountedHuns atthe highest evelsof society,but it wouldnotprovethatmountedHunswerepresent n significant umberswestof theCarpathians.We shallseethat similar onsiderationsffect he inter-pretation f Avarand Hungarian orseburials.

If the precedingdiscussionhas been convincing,the EuropeanHuns'relianceon horses,and therefore he nomadicnatureof theirsocietyandarmy,are doubtfulnotions.This shouldcomeas no sur-prisefor we knowthat no othernomadicgroupwas ableto retain tsnomadicadaptation nce it enteredcentralEurope;andgiventheirpredatoryuccessat raidingundefended illages, hesetribesmaynolongerhavefelt the needor desireto herd ots of horses.Clearly heHunspossessedno nomadicwisdomdenied o theHungariansr theMongols. t does ittle good,then,to speakof nomadism s an eternalconstant n Hunnicsociety. The Huns of Europeanhistoryspana

century n time anda continent n space. Different andscapesmusthave affectedthe character f Hun warfareand society,even if weexcludefrom consideration he impactof Romanvolunteerswhojoined heHuns orthe flight to Romeof Attila'srivals.The receivedtradition's elianceupon an eternalnomadismwith continuously e-plenishedherdsprobably estsuponthelaudabledesire o add to themeagre iterary ources ome comparativematerial, ndthis materialusuallycomesfromInnerAsia.Descriptions f thesocietyandecon-omy of the Mongolshave servedto build a fuller, moreattractive

modelof Hun -society. n principle here s nothingwrongwithsuchcomparisons, xceptas used herewherethey compareappleswithoranges.What we knowof the medievalInnerAsianMongolsmayhelp us to understandhe earlierHsiung-nuon the Chinese rontier,

42 Bokonyi,Histotyof DomesticMammals,p. 267.SeealsoS. Bokonyi,ThePrzeval-skyHorse(London, 974), p. 88.



PAST AND PRESENT4 NUMBER 92

but notthe HunsinEurope.TheHsiung-nu ivedwhere heMongolslived,while theHuns of Attiladidnot. Hungary s notMongolia.To

expect he Huns to haveretained hedomestic conomyof the steppeonce theyhadreached he Danube s to reject he role of ecology nhistory.

Wemay, then,summarizeheresultsofourfirst estbysuggestingthat thecontemporaryourcesdonot justify he receivedviewof theHuns in Europe; hat is, if the Hunsremained power, heywerenolongera nomadicpower.Let us now move to thesecondof ourtestsand askwhether t is possible o bemorepreciseabout hegeograph-icallimitations. t is in the natureof "thought xperiments"uch as

the one whichfollows that they cannotbe conclusive; n fact littlemore than a notion, or an orderof magnitude,maysafelybe drawnfrom the calculationswe shall make. Nonethelesswe shallgain aclearerview of theextent to whichthe landswest of theCarpathiansforeclosed he possibilityof a nomadicpower,had it so wished, per-petuatingtself.43Let us firstconsider he largestareaof contiguouspotentialpasture n Europe, the Alfold, or GreatHungarianPlain.It containsat mostsome42,400 squarekilometres f pasture.44 t isinstructive o notein passing hatthispotentialgrazingareaamountsto less than 4 percent of the availablepasture n the modernMon-golianPeople'sRepublic.A collationof rangemanagementmanualswithstudiesof traditionalHungarian nimalhusbandryuggests hatin the Alfold a horse, living by grazingalone,requires wenty-fiveacresof pastureper year.45The GreatHungarianPlaincould,then,

43 Theideasbehind hesecalculationsrewout of a reading f Sinor's"HorseandPasture n InnerAsianHistory"and someof his ownunpublishedssayswhichPro-fessorJohnMassonSmith Jr. has kindlyshownme over the years. I use a slightlydifferentmethodfromthat of Sinor, and I do not acceptsome of his statistics:hisestimate f the areaof the GreatHungarian lain s much oo high,andhisestimationof the areaof pasture equired o support

horse,basedonAmerican tatisticsor thearidContinental ivide, s also oogreat.Ourapproacho thecalculationss,howevercompatible, nd I would ike to acknowledgemyindebtednesso his article.

44 See theofficialHungariantatistics n Encyclopaediaritannica, sth edn. (Chi-cago, I979), under"Hungary". he standard uthority n thisregion,A. N. J. DenHollander,Nederzettingssormenn-problemenn deGrooteongaarscheaagvlakteAm-sterdam, 947), p. 5, calculateshe area o be 4I,90I squarekilometres.Mylargerfigure ncludespresentlybuilt-upurbanareasexcludedby Den Hollander.Nomadicrrlilitaryecessity orcesus to consideronlycontiguouspasture;dividing he forcesandscattering hemamongsmall,distantpasturesmayfeedhorsesbut soondefeatsthe purposeof a large,mounted orce, sincetime andopportunities re ostbringingthehorsemen acktogether orcombat.

45 Earlynineteenth-centurytatistics ortheyear-round razingneedsof sheepand

cattleappearn H. Ditz, Dieungarischeandwirthschaft:olkswirthschaftlicherencht(Leipzig,I867), p. 262. Den Hollander,Nederzettingssortnenn-problemen,. 43 n.45, discusses heconversion f these figuresnto theanimalunitsused n traditionalhusbandry, nd then into numbersof horsesor pigs:cf. the similarmethodof K.Treiber,Wirtschaftsgeographieesunganschen rossen lfolds Schriftendes Geogra-phischen nstitutsderUniversitatKiel, ii pt. 2, Kiel, I934), p. 42. For the sake ofcomparison, computationorthegrasslands f westernKansas,whoserainfall ndcertain oilcharacteristics atchconditions n theGreatHungarian lain,yieldsthe

(cont. on p. 1s)




support ome320,000horses.46This result, even if it representsonly the middle of a rangeof

possibilities,s clearlyextravagant. irst,our computationsssumedthatthe landwas reserved or horsesalone, andwe mustallow forotherusersof the land: cattle, sheep, pigs, andsomehumanculti-vators. Secondly,some of this land was forested,and much of itdotted with marshes.47Finally,the grazingpracticesof the horsesthemselvescontributed o the depletionof pastureandtherefore otheshrinking f anyrange's arrying apacity.48wouldsuggest hatthe actualcarrying apacityof the GreatHungarianPlainwasmorein theneighbourhoodf I50,000 horses.

We havealreadynotedthat the nomadobtainshis mobility romhis horse. He retains t by possessinga stringof horses, a remountreserve o extend his rangeandpreservehis speed.MarcoPoloob-servedstringscontainingas manyas eighteenhorsesperman on thesteppe,but let us assumean averageof ten horsesper Hun.49Wecouldthen concludethatthe Hungarianplainsmight supportsomeI5,000 nomadwarriors.This result s hypothetical, nd ts probabil-ity is a functionof the actualextentof marshandforest n the fifthcenturyaswell as the amountof competition oruse of thelandfromotheranimalsor cultivators.Full dataabout these constraintsareunavailable, nd soI haveattempted conservativealculation.Nowthepowerof nomadic orcesrestednot onlyon theirhorsemen'skillbutalsoonthe numberof thosehorsemen.OurHuns, it seems,couldnot even havemustered woMongoldivisions,or20,000 horsemen,

(n . 45 cont. )

sameresults:UnitedStatesForestService,TheWestern ange Washington,D.C.I936), pp. 87, I37, 439, 509. Therewasconsiderableebate ateroverthe accuracyof thegrazing tatisticsn this report,butthe orderof magnitudef thestatisticseemssettled.

46 The reader houldbear n mind thatthese horsesaresmaller, otallyrange-fedhorses,not the largerhorse which stall-and lot-feedinghas developedn modernHungary.The range-fedhorseswere physically imilar o the nomads'horses,andtherefore onsiderationsf sizeand dietdo not affect he calculations.

47 For oneestimateof the extentof marsh,moorand forest n medievalHungarysee A. KollautzandH. Miyakawa,GeschichtendKultur inesvolkenranderungszeit-lichenNomadenvolkes:ie3rou-3ranerMongoleinddieAwarennMitteleuropa,vols.(Klagenfurt,970), i, p. I72 map . SeealsoSinor,"Horse ndPasturen InnerAsianHistory", pp. I 8 I-2; Ditz, Ungarischeandwirthschaft,p. 26I-2, with suggestiveremarks n thelong-termdepletionof nutritive rasses;Fel and Hofer,Proper eas-ants,pp. 23, 42, on floodingandmodernandreclamation.

48 W. C. Barnes,WesternGrazingGroundsandForestRanges(Chicago,9I3),p. 77.

Barneswas nspector f grazing or theUnitedStatesForestService.

49 Sinor, "Horseand Pasture n InnerAsianHistory",p. I73; Smith,"MongolManpower ndPersianPopulation", . 297; Williamof Rubruck,n Dawson ed.),MongolMission,pp. I32-3, makes t clear hatevenat a peacetime ace hreechangesof horsea daywore out the animalsandwere thereforenadequate.The Americanponyexpressalloweda minimumof sevenmountsto a rider,and in practice idersoftenchangedmounts en or moretimes n a day:R. W. andM. L. Settle, TheStoryof thePonyExpressLondon, 974), pp. 37-9.



I6PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 92

againstthe Romans' argerresources.50Crossing he Carpathians,then, devastated he logistic base of nomadpoliticaland militarystrength.

In facteven if ourcalculationsweretotally nvalid,theseconclu-sionscouldactuallybestrengthened.Anyatlaswhichshows henatu-ralvegetativecoverof Europewill revealthatthe GreatHungarianPlain s thelargestpastureon thecontinent.Beyond hat,it willalsorevealhowgreat s thegapbetween hecarrying apacity f thatplainand the smaller, scatteredand restrictedpasturesto the west,south-westor south.SlNomadscouldscatter,but not gather,any-where lse. Mountednomadswhowishedto campaignn (say)Italywouldbe forcedeitherto scaledownthe numberoftheirhorsemen(andriskbeingoutnumbered), r to bringalongfewerhorsesas re-mountsthusrestrictingmobilityandrange),ortochance verythingonaveryshortcampaignandspreadouttheirforces o grazedistantpastures,herebyosingthenumerical dvantage).nbrief,whateverdifficultyhe HunshadkeepingenoughhorsesandotheranimalsnHungaryalesbefore he fateawaitinghembeyond heAlfold.

Howdid theHunsrespond o thenewconditionswestof theCar-pathians?hey beganto resemble heirneighbours.Proceeds romtributend raidingseemedmorelucrative hantheanimalprofitsfromusbandingherds.The goodlifecameto be picturedn seden-tary, oman erms,asthe bath-housemplies.The armygrewmoreandmoredependentuponits infantryas its mountedresourcesde-creased.

We mightwell considerextending hisanalysis o explain he set-tlementf theAvarsandHungarians, ndthefailureof theMongolstoeturn o theheartof Europe nthe I240s.Although hisis nottheplaceorafulldiscussionof theseparallelhemes,afewwordsaboutthemportance f horsesamong heAvarsandHungariansmayhelporame hediscussionof the Hunsin awiderperspective.For the AvarandearlyHungarian rastherearenumerous xca-vatedurialsof horsesandriders.Theconclusionsdrawn romthesedeservecloserexamination han they have received.Ourearlierdiscussiononcludedthat a nomadlcmilitary orceowes its effec-tivenesso the numberof its ridersandthe largernumberof theirremounts.forcethatcannotmeettheserequirementsanhopetoachieveo moresuccessfula career hanone of raidingundefendedhamlets.n order,therefore, o drawfromthe Avaror Hungarian

50On the crucial mportance f numbersn the successof nomadic trategy, eemith,MongolManpowerndPersianPopulation". orthesizesof contemporaryrmiesecruitedromsedentarymanpower, ee A. H. M. Jones,TheLaterRomanmpire,vols. (Oxford, 964), i, pp. I96-8.51nthefirst nstance, eetheOxford conomictlasoftheWorld,thedn.(Oxford972),ap6, andthenthestudiesof individual reas, n CommitteeortheWorldtlasf Agricultureeds.), WorldAtlasofAgriculture,(Novara, 969).




burials heconclusions hatthe two tribeswerenomadicor thattheirmilitarypowerrestedon a nomadicbase,at least two conditionsare

to be met:theremust be copiousriders'burials andthenumbersofthese burialsmust be comparedwith otherburials),and theremustbe evidenceof manyhorses.The archaeologicaliterature as neitherrecognized or satisfied heseconstraints.52he burialsarenot proofof AvarorHungarianmounted trength.Evidenceof cavalry r cow-boys is not evidenceof a mountednomadichorde.

The literary ourcesalsodo not shownomadicarmiesat the rootof Avaror Hungarian uccess.Just as the Huns were betterat raidsthan in battle,so were the Avarand Hungarianmilitary xperiences

echoesof Attila's.The sources'descriptions f Avarcampaigns ur-ing the latersixth centuryshow that horsemenplayedno significantroleanddisplayno tracesof the tacticsof mountedarchery.The greatAvarbattleswere nfantrybattles.53 orexample,Avarhorsemen resupposed ohavetakenpart n the siegeofConstantinoplen 626, butthe sourcespeaksof infantryalone.54Whilethere may be plenty ofevidenceof the nomadicpastoralismndskilled,mountedarchery fthe Avars'antecedents n InnerAsia, it is an error or theirhistoriansto compress he InnerAsiansteppe ntothe Alfold.

Scholarsof earlyHungarianhistoryhavefollowedstudentsof theAvarsandHuns in the beliefthat a description f the tribenorthofthe BlackSea may also serveto picture t west of the Carpathians.They differ,however, n terming he societyof conquest-eraHungarya "semi-nomadic"ociety,markedby fishing,pastoralism, ultiva-tion and migrationalong the banks of rivers.55The term "semi-nomad" eemschosen n thehope of preserving he martial igourof

52 For representative escriptions f horse burials,see Kollautzand MiyakawaGeschichtendKultur inesvolkerzvanderungszeitlichenomadenvolkes,i, passim,A.TocA, Altmagyarischer&berfeldern derSudwestslowakeiBratislava,968). The in-

terpretationf horseand riderburials s morecomplex han t mightseem. Is it, forexample, orrecto assume hata nomadpossessing stringof horseswouldbe contentto be accompaniedo eternityby just one horse?

53 The Avararmyon foot n 580:Menander rotector,rag.63 (F.H.G., iv, p. 264)campaign f 593: Theophylact imocatta, i. 4-5 (ed. C. de Boor, Leipzig,I887, pp.228-9); in 596: btd.,vii. I2 (pp. 265-6);and n 599: bid.,viii. 2-3 (pp.286-7).Becausehe also mentionsbuffaloes, he accountof wild horses n Paul the Deacon,HistoriaLangabardorum,v. I0 (ed. G. Waitz, M.G.H., Scriptores erumGermanicarumnusumscholarum,Hanover, 878, p. I50), iS doubtfulevidence or anomadichorde.Against he rumour ransuiittednd acknowledgeds such by Menander,n frag.48

(F.H.G., iv, p. 252), of 600,000horsemen n 578, must be placed heaccountof thatcampaignwhichhas the Avarsoperating romaboard hips:KollautzandMiyakawaGeschichtendKultur inesvolkerwanderungszeitlichenomadenvolkes,, p. 240 n. 3.

54 Kollautzand Miyakawa,Geschichte ndKultur inesvolkenvanderungszeitlichenNomadenvolkes,, p. 230; Chroniconaschale, d. L. Dindorf,2 vols. (Corpus crip-torumhistoriaeByzantinae,Bonn,I832), i, p. 7I9.

55G. Gyorffy,"Systemedes residences 'hiver t d'etechez es nomadest les chefshongroisduX'siecle", Archivam urasiaemedii evi,i (I975), pp. 47-54; G. Gyorffy,"Autourde l'etatdes semi-nomades:e cas de la Hongrie", n Commission ationaledes historienshongrois,Etudeshistoriqguesongroises,975, 2 vols. (Budapest, 975),

1, pp. 225-7-



PAST AND PRESENT NUMBER 92

steppenomadismwhencombinedwithagriculture nd cattleor pighusbandry. twouldbebetter o accept hearchaeologicalndcharter

evidence orwhat it is: an indicatorof settlementand adoptionof amixed agriculturedefinedby intensivecultivation,stock-breedingandoccasionalpastoralism.56uch a milieu doesnot admitthe no-mad'shorses to grazefreely:the smalleranimalscrop the grassesmorecloselythan horsescan, and no enterprising omadwould ac-cept such a stateof affairsand turn to the time-consumingaskofraising odderfor his horses. The conceptof "semi-nomadism",arfrom answeringquestions, serves merely to mask them. "Semi-nomadism"s at besta varietyof settled ife, notof nomadism.

Forevidenceof theearlyHungarians sa mountedhorde n Europewe turn to the historyof theirraids in the tenthcentury.57A fulldiscussionmust takeplace elsewhere;n brief,however, t is againnecessary o distinguisha raid, in whicha smallgroupof men meetonly hastilyformed, ocalopposition, roma battlebetween wo ar-mies.Turning o raids, t is hard o see themas examples f nomadicstrengthor strategy.The sackof Basle nJanuaryI7 couldnot haveinvolvedmanyhorsesfor there was no grazingavailable.58 or canthe earlyHungarians ave prized heirmobility,when theyadopted

the practiceof takingcaptiveson foot and marching hem east.59

They had put the cartbeforethe horse. In battlethe Hungariansresembled heiropponentsmorethan they do the Mongols.At thebattleof Riadein 933 the Hungariansled beforeHenryI's smallforce of heavilyarmed cavalry,and this was no nomadicfeignedretreat,to be followedby a wheelingturn backon to the enemy'sflanks: ven if we deflateLiudprand f Cremona'suridpassages,wemust concludethat the battledisplayedthe transformationf theHungarianribesmen nto a sedentary rmy.60Finally, we have thebattleat the Lech, in which OttoI's armywith its heavycavalrywas

56 I. Dienes, TheHunganansCrossheCarpathiansBudapest,972), p. 34, sum-marizeshe archaeologicalnvestigations.

57 R. Luttich,Ungarnzagen Europam IO. 3'ahrhundertBerlin, 9I0); G. Fasoli,Le incursioningaren Europanel secoloX (Florence, 945); S. de Vajay,DerEintrittdesungartschentammebundesn dieeuropaischeeschichteMainz, 968). The reliefonthe Nagyszentmiklosoblet,picturedn ibid., p. I53, and elsewhere,depictsa riderwithout tirrups r bow, surelynot a nomad

58 Luttich,UngarzugeinEuropa, . 66; Fasoli, ncursioniangareinEuropa,. I3I;

De Vajay,Eintritt esungarischentammebundes,. 57.

sgK. Leyser,"Henry andthe Beginnings f theSaxonEmpire",Eng.Hist.Rev.,lXxXiii (I968), pp. 4, 8. Manyof the military ictories verHungarianaiders ccurredwhile he raiderswerereturningast, booty-laden. he factthat he Hungariansould

not escape evere osseson theseoccasions rguesagainst heirstrengthn horsesandagainstheirhavingretained nomadic trategy ny onger.

60 Ibid., p. 23. On the smallsize of German avalry orces,see K. Leyser, "TheBattleat the Lech, 955: A Study n Tenth-CenturyWarfare"History, (I965), pp.

I6-I7; Widukindof Corvey, . 38 (ed. H.-E. Lohmannanl P. Hirsch,M.G.H.,ScriptoreserumGermanicarum,ndser., I3 vols., I922-62, v, pp. 56-7), Liudprandof Cremona,Antapodosis,i. 3I (ed. J. Becker,M.G.H., ScriptoreserumGermani-carumn usumscholarum,Hanover, 9I5, pp. 5I-2).




able to catchup with the Hungarians,who had stopped o rest theirwearyhorses.61Lackingremounts, he Hungariansweredecimated.

It is only a shortstep fromtiredhorses o the finalevidenceof settledmilitary trategy: he Hungarians egan o buildfortifications gainstOttonian raids.62All these themes should have separate,detaileddevelopment, ut the centralpointremains: he constraints f pastureremained he same or the Hungarians.The Carpathians ark he farwestern rontierof the historyof nomadism.

When the Huns first appearedon the steppe north of the BlackSea, they were nomadsand most of them may have been mountedwarriors. n Europe, however, they could graze only a fractionof

theirformerhorse-power, nd theirchiefs soon fieldedarmieswhichresembled the sedentaryforces of Rome. Those chroniclerswhowishedto embellish heir accountscopieda descriptionwhich fittedanother setting, really another world. That this exaggerated heenemy'spower only fitted their rhetorical mbitions;unfortunatelyit has also deceived modern readers. A conscientiousstudent ofHunnicarchaeology as concluded hat the "Hunscouldnot give upthe systemof nomadic tock-breeding, mongothers,for the simplereason . . [that]this would have struckat the root of theirmilitarypower".63Exactlyso: nature orcedthem to give it up, the loss un-dermined heir militarystrength,and in due coursemilitary ailuredoomed heirtribe.

UniversityfMichigan Rudi aulLindner

61 Leyser,"Battle t the Lech",p. 24; Widukind, ii. 46 (ed. Lohmann ndHirschp. I28). Leyserestimates hatno more hanfourthousandmen fought or Ottoat theLech: "Battleat the Lech", p. I7.

62 H. Gockenjan,Hilfssolker ndGrenzwachterm mittelalterlicherngarn Quellenund Studien ur Geschichte es ostlichenEuropa,v, Wiesbaden,972), pp. 5, 7.

63 J. Harmatta,"The Dissolutionof the Hun Empire:Hun Society n the Age ofAttila",Actaarchaeologicacademiae cientiarum ungaricae,i (I952), p. 284.

Documents

Nomadism, Horses and Huns