Xiongnu
Template:Pp-semi-indef Template:Short description Template:Use dmy dates Template:Infobox country Template:Infobox Chinese Template:History of Mongolia The Xiongnu (Template:Zh,<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> Template:IPAc-cmn) were a tribal confederation<ref>Template:Cite web</ref> of nomadic peoples who, according to ancient Chinese sources, inhabited the eastern Eurasian Steppe from the 3rd century BC to the late 1st century AD. Modu Chanyu, the supreme leader after 209 BC, founded the Xiongnu Empire.Template:Sfn
After overthrowing their previous overlords,<ref>Template:Cite book "The primary focus of the new threat became the Xiongnu who emerged rather abruptly in the late 4th century BC. Initially subordinated to the Yuezhi, the Xiongnu overthrew the nomadic hierarchy while also escalating its attacks on Chinese areas."</ref> the Yuezhi, the Xiongnu became the dominant power on the steppes of East Asia, centred on the Mongolian Plateau. The Xiongnu were also active in areas now part of Siberia, Inner Mongolia, Gansu and Xinjiang. Their relations with the Chinese dynasties to the south-east were complex—alternating between various periods of peace, war, and subjugation. Ultimately, the Xiongnu were defeated by the Han dynasty in a centuries-long conflict, which led to the confederation splitting in two, and forcible resettlement of large numbers of Xiongnu within Han borders. During the Sixteen Kingdoms era, listed as one of the "Five Barbarians", their descendants founded the dynastic states of Han-Zhao, Northern Liang and Helian Xia and during the Northern and Southern dynasties founded Northern Zhou (founded by member of Yuwen tribe of Xiongnu origin) in northern China.
Attempts to associate the Xiongnu with the nearby Sakas and Sarmatians were once controversial. However, archaeogenetics has confirmed their interaction with the Xiongnu, and also possibly their relation to the Huns. The identity of the ethnic core of Xiongnu has been a subject of varied hypotheses, because only a few words, mainly titles and personal names, were preserved in the Chinese sources. The name Xiongnu may be cognate with that of the Huns or the Huna,Template:SfnTemplate:SfnTemplate:Sfn although this is disputed.Template:Sfn<ref name="vaissiere2006">Template:Cite encyclopedia</ref> Other linguistic links—all of them also controversial—proposed by scholars include Turkic,Template:Sfn<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref><ref>Template:CitationTemplate:Cite web</ref><ref>Template:Cite bookTemplate:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite bookTemplate:Cite bookTemplate:Cite bookTemplate:Cite bookTemplate:Cite bookTemplate:Cite bookTemplate:Cite bookTemplate:Cite bookTemplate:Cite book</ref> Iranian,<ref name="Harmatta488">Template:Harvnb: "Their royal tribes and kings (shan-yü) bore Iranian names and all the Hsiung-nu words noted by the Chinese can be explained from an Iranian language of Saka type. It is therefore clear that the majority of Hsiung-nu tribes spoke an Eastern Iranian language."</ref>Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn Mongolic,<ref name="Tumen">Template:Cite journal</ref> Uralic,Template:Sfn Yeniseian,Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> or multi-ethnic.Template:Sfn
Name
[edit]The word "Xiōngnú" means "fierce slave."Template:Sfn They were identified by the Han Chinese as invaders from the north who rode on horseback.<ref name="Zeldovich 2023">Template:Cite web</ref> The pronunciation of 匈奴 as Xiōngnú Template:IPAc-cmn is the modern Mandarin Chinese pronunciation, from the Mandarin dialect spoken now in Beijing, which came into existence less than 1,000 years ago. "The Old Chinese pronunciation has been reconstructed as *xiuoŋ-na or *qhoŋna.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> Sinologist Axel Schuessler (2014) reconstructs the pronunciations of 匈奴 as *hoŋ-nâ in Late Old Chinese (Template:Circa) and as *hɨoŋ-nɑ in Eastern Han Chinese; citing other Chinese transcriptions wherein the velar nasal medial -ŋ-, after a short vowel, seemingly played the role of a general nasal – sometimes equivalent to n or m –, Schuessler proposes that 匈奴 Xiongnu < *hɨoŋ-nɑ < *hoŋ-nâ might be a Chinese rendition, Han or even pre-Han, of foreign *Hŏna or *Hŭna, which Schuessler compares to Huns and Sanskrit Hūṇā.Template:Sfn However, the same medial -ŋ- prompts Christopher P. Atwood (2015) to reconstruct *Xoŋai, which he derives from the Ongi River (Template:Langx) in Mongolia and suggests that it was originally a dynastic name rather than an ethnic name.<ref>Atwood, Christopher P. (2015). "The Kai, the Khongai, and the Names of the Xiōngnú". International Journal of Eurasian Studies. 2: p of 45–47 of 35–63.</ref>
History
[edit]Predecessors
[edit]Template:Annotated image The territories associated with the Xiongnu in central/east Mongolia were previously inhabited by the Slab Grave Culture (Ancient Northeast Asian origin), which persisted until the 3rd century BC.<ref>Template:Cite journal "The slab graves culture existed in this territory prior to the Xiongnu empire. Sites of this culture dating back to approximately 1100-400/300 BC are common in Mongolia and the Trans-Baikal area. The earliest calibrated dates are prior to 1500 BC (Miyamoto et al., 2016). Later dates are usually 100–200 years earlier than the Xiongnu culture. Therefore, it is customarily considered that the slab grave culture preceded the Xiongnu culture. There is only one case, reported by Miyamoto et al. (2016), in which the date of the slab grave corresponds to the time of the making of the Xiongnu Empire."</ref> Genetic research indicates that the Slab Grave people were the primary ancestors of the Xiongnu, and that the Xiongnu formed through substantial and complex mixture with West Eurasians.<ref>Template:Harvnb</ref>
During the Western Zhou (1045–771 BC), there were numerous conflicts with nomadic tribes from the north and the northwest, variously known as the Xianyun, Guifang, or various "Rong" tribes, such as the Xirong, Shanrong or Quanrong.<ref name="WT"/> These tribes are recorded as harassing Zhou territory, but at the time the Zhou were expanding northwards, encroaching on their traditional lands, especially into the Wei River valley. Archaeologically, the Zhou expanded to the north and the northwest at the expense of the Siwa culture.<ref name="WT">Template:Cite book</ref> The Quanrong put an end to the Western Zhou in 771 BC, sacking the Zhou capital of Haojing and killing the last Western Zhou king You.<ref name="WT"/> Thereafter the task of dealing with the northern tribes was left to their vassal, the Qin state.<ref name="WT"/>
To the west, the Pazyryk culture (6th–3rd century BC) immediately preceded the formation of the Xiongnus.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> A Scythian culture,<ref>Template:Cite web</ref> it was identified by excavated artifacts and mummified humans, such as the Siberian Ice Maiden, found in the Siberian permafrost, in the Altai Mountains, Kazakhstan and nearby Mongolia.<ref>Template:Harvnb</ref> To the south, the Ordos culture had developed in the Ordos Loop (modern Inner Mongolia, China) during the Bronze and early Iron Age from the 6th to 2nd centuries BC. Of unknown ethno-linguistic origin, it is thought to represent the easternmost extension of Indo-European-speakers.<ref>Template:Harvnb: "From that time until the HAN dynasty the Ordos steppe was the home of semi-nomadic Indo-European peoples whose culture can be regarded as an eastern province of a vast Eurasian continuum of Scytho-Siberian cultures."</ref><ref name="Harmatta348">Template:Harvnb: "From the first millennium b.c., we have abundant historical, archaeological and linguistic sources for the location of the territory inhabited by the Iranian peoples. In this period the territory of the northern Iranians, they being equestrian nomads, extended over the whole zone of the steppes and the wooded steppes and even the semi-deserts from the Great Hungarian Plain to the Ordos in northern China."</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> The Yuezhi were displaced by the Xiongnu expansion in the 2nd century BC, and had to migrate to Central and Southern Asia.<ref>Template:Cite web</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref>
Early history
[edit]Template:Multiple image Western Han historian Sima Qian composed an early yet detailed exposition on the Xiongnu in one liezhuan (arrayed account) of his Records of the Grand Historian (Template:Circa BC), wherein the Xiongnu were alleged to be descendants of a certain Chunwei, who in turn descended from the "lineage of Lord Xia", a.k.a. Yu the Great.<ref>"The Account of the Xiongnu, Records of the Grand Historian",Sima Qian.DOI: https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004216358_00</ref><ref>Shiji Ch. 110: Xiongnu liezhuan quote: "匈奴，其先祖夏后氏之苗裔也，曰淳維。"</ref> Even so, Sima Qian also drew a distinct line between the settled Huaxia people (Han) to the pastoral nomads (Xiongnu), characterizing them as two polar groups in the sense of a civilization versus an uncivilized society: the Hua–Yi distinction.Template:Sfn Sima Qian also mentioned Xiongnu's early appearance north of Wild Goose Gate and Dai commanderies before 265 BC, just before the Zhao-Xiongnu War;<ref>Shiji Vol. 81 "Stories about Lian Po and Lin Xiangru - Addendum: Li Mu" text: "李牧者，趙之北邊良將也。常居代鴈門，備匈奴。" translation: "About Li Mu, he was a good general at Zhao's northern borders. He often stationed at Dai and Wild Goose Gate, prepared [against] the Xiongnu."</ref><ref>Theobald, Ulrich (2019) "Li Mu 李牧" in ChinaKnowledge.de - An Encyclopaedia on Chinese History, Literature and Art</ref> however, sinologist Edwin Pulleyblank (1994) contends that pre-241-BC references to the Xiongnu are anachronistic substitutions for the Hu people instead.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn Sometimes the Xiongnu were distinguished from other nomadic peoples; namely, the Hu people;Template:Sfn yet on other occasions, Chinese sources often just classified the Xiongnu as a Hu people, which was a blanket term for nomadic people.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn Even Sima Qian was inconsistent: in the chapter "Hereditary House of Zhao", he considered the Donghu to be the Hu proper,<ref name = "hu proper">Shiji, "Hereditary House of Zhao" quote: "今中山在我腹心，北有燕，東有胡，西有林胡、樓煩、秦、韓之邊，而無彊兵之救，是亡社稷，柰何？" translation: "(King Wuling of Zhao to Lou Huan:) Now Zhongshan is at our heart and belly [note: Zhao surrounded Zhongshan, except on Zhongshan's north-eastern side], Yan to the north, Hu to the east, Forest Hu, Loufan, Qin, Han at our borders to the west. Yet we have no strong army to help us, surely we will lose our country. What is to be done?"</ref><ref name = "ZGC">Compare a parallel passage in Stratagems of the Warring States, "King Wuling spends his day in idleness", quote: "自常山以至代、上黨，東有燕、東胡之境，西有樓煩、秦、韓之邊，而無騎射之備。" Jennifer Dodgson's translation: "From Mount Chang to Dai and Shangdang, our lands border Yan and the Donghu in the east, and to the west we have the Loufan and shared borders with Qin and Han. Nevertheless, we have no mounted archers ready for action."</ref> yet elsewhere he considered Xiongnu to be also Hu.<ref name = "xiongnu hu">Shiji, Vol. 110 "Account of the Xiongnu". quote: "後秦滅六國，而始皇帝使蒙恬將十萬之眾北擊胡，悉收河南地。…… 匈奴單于曰頭曼，頭曼不勝秦，北徙。" translation: "Later on, Qin conquered the six other states, and the First Emperor dispatched general Meng Tian to lead a multitude of 100,000 north to attack the Hu; and he took all lands south the Yellow River. [...] The Xiongnu chanyu was Touman; Touman could not win against Qin, so [they] fled north."</ref>Template:Sfn
Ancient China often came in contact with the Xianyun and the Xirong nomadic peoples. In later Chinese historiography, some groups of these peoples were believed to be the possible progenitors of the Xiongnu people.Template:Sfn These nomadic people often had repeated military confrontations with the Shang and especially the Zhou, who often conquered and enslaved the nomads in an expansion drift.Template:Sfn During the Warring States period, the armies from the Qin, Zhao and Yan states were encroaching and conquering various nomadic territories that were inhabited by the Xiongnu and other Hu peoples.Template:Sfn
Pulleyblank argued that the Xiongnu were part of a Xirong group called Yiqu, who had lived in Shaanbei and had been influenced by China for centuries, before they were driven out by the Qin dynasty.Template:SfnTemplate:Sfn Qin's campaign against the Xiongnu expanded Qin's territory at the expense of the Xiongnu.Template:Sfn After the unification of Qin dynasty, Xiongnu was a threat to the northern border of Qin. They were likely to attack the Qin dynasty when they suffered natural disasters.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>
State formation
[edit]The first known Xiongnu leader was Touman, who reigned between 220 and 209 BC. In 215 BC, Chinese Emperor Qin Shi Huang sent General Meng Tian on a military campaign against the Xiongnu. Meng Tian defeated the Xiongnu and expelled them from the Ordos Loop, forcing Touman and the Xiongnu to flee north into the Mongolian Plateau.Template:Sfn In 210 BC, Meng Tian died, and in 209 BC, Touman's son Modu became the Xiongnu Chanyu.
In order to protect the Xiongnu from the threat of the Qin dynasty, Modu Chanyu united the Xiongnu into a powerful confederation.Template:Sfn This transformed the Xiongnu into a more formidable polity, able to form larger armies and exercise improved strategic coordination. The Qin dynasty fell in 207 BC, and was replaced by the Western Han dynasty in 202 BC after a period of internal conflict. This period of Chinese instability was a time of prosperity for the Xiongnu, who adopted many Han agriculture techniques such as slaves for heavy labor and lived in Han-style homes.Template:Sfn
After forging internal unity, Modu Chanyu expanded the Xiongnu empire in all directions. To the north he conquered a number of nomadic peoples, including the Dingling of southern Siberia. He crushed the power of the Donghu people of eastern Mongolia and Manchuria as well as the Yuezhi in the Hexi Corridor of Gansu, where his son, Jizhu, made a skull cup out of the Yuezhi king. Modu also retook the original homeland of Xiongnu on the Yellow River, which had previously been taken by the Qin general Meng Tian.Template:Sfn Under Modu's leadership, the Xiongnu became powerful enough to threaten the Han dynasty.
In 200 BC, Modu besieged the first Han dynasty emperor Gaozu (Gao-Di) with his 320,000-strong army at Peteng Fortress in Baideng (present-day Datong, Shanxi).Template:Sfn After Gaozu (Gao-Di) agreed to all Modu's terms, such as ceding the northern provinces to the Xiongnu and paying annual taxes, he was allowed to leave the siege. Although Gaozu was able to return to his capital Chang'an (present-day Xi'an), Modu occasionally threatened the Han's northern frontier and finally in 198 BC, a peace treaty was settled.
Xiongnu in their expansion drove their western neighbour Yuezhi from the Hexi Corridor in year 176 BC, killing the Yuezhi king and asserting their presence in the Western Regions.Template:Sfn
By the time of Modu's death in 174 BC, the Xiongnu were recognized as the most prominent of the nomads bordering the Han empireTemplate:Sfn According to the Book of Han, later quoted in Duan Chengshi's ninth-century Miscellaneous Morsels from Youyang: Template:Blockquote
Xiongnu hierarchy
[edit]
The ruler of the Xiongnu was called the chanyu.<ref name=bar81-48>Template:Cite journal</ref> Under him were the tuqi kings.<ref name=bar81-48/> The Tuqi King of the Left was normally the heir presumptive.<ref name=bar81-48/> Below him in the hierarchy were more officials in pairs of left and right: the guli, the army commanders, the great governors, the danghu and the gudu. Beneath them were the commanders of detachments of one thousand, of one hundred, and of ten men. This nation of nomads, was organized like an army.Template:Sfn
After Modu, later leaders formed a dualistic system of political organisation with the left and right branches of the Xiongnu divided on a regional basis. The chanyu or shanyu, a ruler equivalent to the Emperor of China, exercised direct authority over the central territory. Longcheng (around the Khangai Mountains, Otuken)<ref>Template:Cite web</ref><ref>Template:Cite web</ref> (Chinese: 龍城; Mongolian: Luut; lit. "Dragon City") became the annual meeting place and served as the Xiongnu capital.<ref name=yuuu86-384>Template:Cite book</ref> The ruins of Longcheng were found south of Ulziit District, Arkhangai Province in 2017.<ref>Template:Cite web</ref>
North of Shanxi with the Tuqi King of the Left was holding the area north of Beijing and the Tuqi King of the Right was holding the Ordos Loop area as far as Gansu.Template:Sfn
Marriage diplomacy with Han dynasty
[edit]Template:Main In the winter of 200 BC, following a Xiongnu siege of Taiyuan, Emperor Gaozu of Han personally led a military campaign against Modu Chanyu. At the Battle of Baideng, he was ambushed, reputedly by Xiongnu cavalry. The emperor was cut off from supplies and reinforcements for seven days, only narrowly escaping capture.
The Han dynasty sent commoner women falsely labeled as "princesses" and members of the Han imperial family to the Xiongnu multiple times when they were practicing Heqin (Template:Zh) marriage alliances with the Xiongnu in order to avoid sending the emperor's daughters.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref> The Han sent these "princesses" to marry Xiongnu leaders in their efforts to stop the border raids. Along with arranged marriages, the Han sent gifts to bribe the Xiongnu to stop attacking.Template:Sfn After the defeat at Pingcheng in 200 BC, the Han emperor abandoned a military solution to the Xiongnu threat. Instead, in 198 BC, the courtier Template:Interlanguage link multi was dispatched for negotiations. The peace settlement eventually reached between the parties included a Han princess given in marriage to the chanyu; periodic gifts to the Xiongnu of silk, distilled beverages and rice; equal status between the states; and a boundary wall as a mutual border.
.jpg){kind=link}
This first treaty set the pattern for relations between the Han and the Xiongnu for sixty years. Up to 135 BC, the treaty was renewed nine times, each time with an increase in the "gifts" to the Xiongnu Empire. In 192 BC, Modun even asked for the hand of Emperor Gaozu of Han widow Empress Lü Zhi. His son and successor, the energetic Jiyu, known as Laoshang Chanyu, continued his father's expansionist policies. Laoshang succeeded in negotiating terms with Emperor Wen for the maintenance of a large scale government sponsored market system.
While the Xiongnu benefited handsomely, from the Chinese perspective marriage treaties were costly, very humiliating and ineffective. Laoshang Chanyu showed that he did not take the peace treaty seriously. On one occasion his scouts penetrated to a point near Chang'an. In 166 BC he personally led 140,000 cavalry to invade Anding, reaching as far as the imperial retreat at Yong. In 158 BC, his successor sent 30,000 cavalry to attack Shangdang and another 30,000 to Yunzhong.Template:Citation needed
The Xiongnu also practiced marriage alliances with Han dynasty officers and officials who defected to their side by marrying off sisters and daughters of the Chanyu to Han Chinese who joined the Xiongnu and Xiongnu in Han service. The daughter of Laoshang Chanyu (and older sister of Junchen Chanyu and Yizhixie Chanyu) was married to the Xiongnu General Zhao Xin, the Marquis of Xi who was serving the Han dynasty. The daughter of Qiedihou Chanyu was married to the Han Chinese General Li Ling after he surrendered and defected.<ref>Template:Citation</ref><ref name="SimaWatson1993">Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref name="Wakeman1985">Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref> Another Han Chinese General who defected to the Xiongnu was Li Guangli, a general in the War of the Heavenly Horses, who also married a daughter of the Hulugu Chanyu.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> The Han Chinese diplomat Su Wu married a Xiongnu woman given by Li Ling when he was arrested and taken captive.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> Han Chinese explorer Zhang Qian married a Xiongnu woman and had a child with her when he was taken captive by the Xiongnu.<ref name="James A. Millward 2007 20">Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref name="Yiping Zhang 2005 22">Template:Cite book</ref><ref name="Charles Higham 2004 409">Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref name="Mayor2014">Template:Cite book</ref>
The khagans of the Yenisei Kyrgyz Khaganate claimed descent from the Chinese general Li Ling, grandson of the Han dynasty general Li Guang.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref name="Kyzlasov">Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref> Li Ling was captured by the Xiongnu and defected in the first century BC.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> And since the Tang royal Li family also claimed descent from Li Guang, the Kirghiz Khagan was therefore recognized as a member of the Tang Imperial family. This relationship soothed the relationship when Kyrgyz khagan Are (阿熱) invaded Uyghur Khaganate and executed Qasar Qaghan. The news brought to Chang'an by Kyrgyz ambassador Zhuwu Hesu (註吾合素).
Han–Xiongnu war
[edit]
The Han dynasty made preparations for war when the Han Emperor Wu dispatched the Han Chinese explorer Zhang Qian to explore the mysterious kingdoms to the west and to form an alliance with the Yuezhi people in order to combat the Xiongnu. During this time Zhang married a Xiongnu wife, who bore him a son, and gained the trust of the Xiongnu leader.<ref name="James A. Millward 2007 20"/><ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref name="Yiping Zhang 2005 22"/><ref name="Charles Higham 2004 409"/><ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref name="Mayor2014"/> While Zhang Qian did not succeed in this mission,Template:Sfn his reports of the west provided even greater incentive to counter the Xiongnu hold on westward routes out of the Han Empire, and the Han prepared to mount a large scale attack using the Northern Silk Road to move men and material.
While the Han dynasty had been making preparations for a military confrontation since the reign of Emperor Wen, the break did not come until 133 BC, following an abortive trap to ambush the Chanyu at Mayi. By that point the empire was consolidated politically, militarily and economically, and was led by an adventurous pro-war faction at court. In that year, Emperor Wu reversed the decision he had made the year before to renew the peace treaty.
Full-scale war broke out in late 129 BC, when 40,000 Han cavalry made a surprise attack on the Xiongnu at the border markets. In 127 BC, the Han general Wei Qing retook the Ordos. In 121 BC, the Xiongnu suffered another setback when Huo Qubing led a force of light cavalry westward out of Longxi and within six days fought his way through five Xiongnu kingdoms. The Xiongnu Hunye king was forced to surrender with 40,000 men. In 119 BC both Huo and Wei, each leading 50,000 cavalrymen and 100,000 footsoldiers (in order to keep up with the mobility of the Xiongnu, many of the non-cavalry Han soldiers were mobile infantrymen who traveled on horseback but fought on foot), and advancing along different routes, forced the Chanyu and his Xiongnu court to flee north of the Gobi Desert.Template:Sfn
.jpg){kind=link}
Major logistical difficulties limited the duration and long-term continuation of these campaigns. According to the analysis of Yan You (嚴尤), the difficulties were twofold. Firstly there was the problem of supplying food across long distances. Secondly, the weather in the northern Xiongnu lands was difficult for Han soldiers, who could never carry enough fuel.Template:Efn According to official reports, the Xiongnu lost 80,000 to 90,000 men, and out of the 140,000 horses the Han forces had brought into the desert, fewer than 30,000 returned to the Han Empire.
In 104 and 102 BC, the Han fought and won the War of the Heavenly Horses against the Kingdom of Dayuan. As a result, the Han gained many Ferghana horses which further aided them in their battle against the Xiongnu. As a result of these battles, the Han Empire controlled the strategic region from the Ordos and Gansu corridor to Lop Nor. They succeeded in separating the Xiongnu from the Qiang peoples to the south, and also gained direct access to the Western Regions. Because of strong Han control over the Xiongnu, the Xiongnu became unstable and were no longer a threat to the Han Empire.Template:Sfn
Xiongnu Civil War (60–53 BC)
[edit]
When a chanyu died, power could pass to his younger brother if his son was not of age. This system normally kept an adult male on the throne, but could cause trouble in later generations when there were several lineages that might claim the throne. When Xulüquanqu Chanyu died in 60 BC, power was taken by Woyanqudi, a grandson of Xulüquanqu's cousin. Being something of a usurper, he tried to put his own men in power, which only increased his number of his enemies. Xulüquanqu's son fled east and, in 58 BC, revolted. Few would support Woyanqudi and he was driven to suicide, leaving the rebel son, Huhanye, as the chanyu. The Woyanqudi faction then set up his brother, Tuqi, as chanyu in 58 BC. In 57 BC three more men declared themselves Chanyu. Two dropped their claims in favor of the third who was defeated by Tuqi in that year and surrendered to Huhanye the following year. In 56 BC Tuqi was defeated by Huhanye and committed suicide, but two more claimants appeared: Runzhen and Huhanye's elder brother Zhizhi Chanyu. Runzhen was killed by Zhizhi in 54 BC, leaving only Zhizhi and Huhanye. Zhizhi grew in power, and, in 53 BC, Huhanye moved south and submitted to the Chinese. Huhanye used Chinese support to weaken Zhizhi, who gradually moved west. In 49 BC, a brother to Tuqi set himself up as Chanyu and was killed by Zhizhi. In 36 BC, Zhizhi was killed by a Chinese army while trying to establish a new kingdom in the far west near Lake Balkhash.
Tributary relations with the Han
[edit]In 53 BC Huhanye decided to enter into tributary relations with Han China.Template:Sfn The original terms insisted on by the Han court were that, first, the Chanyu or his representatives should come to the capital to pay homage; secondly, the Chanyu should send a hostage prince; and thirdly, the Chanyu should present tribute to the Han emperor. The political status of the Xiongnu in the Chinese world order was reduced from that of a "brotherly state" to that of an "outer vassal" (外臣).
.jpg){kind=link}
Huhanye sent his son, the "wise king of the right" Shuloujutang, to the Han court as hostage. In 51 BC he personally visited Chang'an to pay homage to the emperor on the Lunar New Year. In the same year, another envoy Qijushan was received at the Ganquan Palace in the north-west of modern Shanxi.Template:Sfn On the financial side, Huhanye was amply rewarded in large quantities of gold, cash, clothes, silk, horses and grain for his participation. Huhanye made two further homage trips, in 49 BC and 33 BC; with each one the imperial gifts were increased. On the last trip, Huhanye took the opportunity to ask to be allowed to become an imperial son-in-law. As a sign of the decline in the political status of the Xiongnu, Emperor Yuan refused, giving him instead five ladies-in-waiting. One of them was Wang Zhaojun, famed in Chinese folklore as one of the Four Beauties.
When Zhizhi learned of his brother's submission, he also sent a son to the Han court as hostage in 53 BC. Then twice –in 51 BC and 50 BC– he sent envoys to the Han court with tribute. But having failed to pay homage personally, he was never admitted to the tributary system. In 36 BC, a junior officer named Chen Tang, with the help of Gan Yanshou, protector-general of the Western Regions, assembled an expeditionary force that defeated him at the Battle of Zhizhi and sent his head as a trophy to Chang'an.
Tributary relations were discontinued during the reign of Huduershi (18–48 AD), corresponding to the political upheavals of the Xin dynasty. The Xiongnu took the opportunity to regain control of the western regions, as well as neighboring peoples such as the Wuhuan. In 24 AD, Hudershi even talked about reversing the tributary system.
Southern Xiongnu and Northern Xiongnu
[edit]
The Xiongnu's new power was met with a policy of appeasement by Emperor Guangwu. At the height of his power, Huduershi even compared himself to his illustrious ancestor, Modu. Due to growing regionalism among the Xiongnu, however, Huduershi was never able to establish unquestioned authority. In contravention of a principle of fraternal succession established by Huhanye, Huduershi designated his son Punu as heir-apparent. However, as the eldest son of the preceding chanyu, Bi (Pi)—the Rizhu King of the Right—had a more legitimate claim. Consequently, Bi refused to attend the annual meeting at the chanyuTemplate:'s court. Nevertheless, in 46 AD, Punu ascended the throne.
In 48 AD, a confederation of eight Xiongnu tribes in Bi's power base in the south, with a military force totalling 40,000 to 50,000 men, seceded from Punu's kingdom and acclaimed Bi as chanyu. This kingdom became known as the Southern Xiongnu.
Northern Xiongnu
[edit]The rump kingdom under Punu, around the Orkhon (modern north central Mongolia) became known as the Northern Xiongnu, with Punu, becoming known as the Northern Chanyu. In 49 AD, the Northern Xiongnu was dealt a heavy defeat to the Southern Xiongnu. That same year, Zhai Tong, a Han governor of Liaodong also enticed the Wuhuan and Xianbei into attacking the Northern Xiongnu.Template:Sfn Soon, Punu began sending envoys on several separate occasions to negotiate peace with the Han dynasty, but made little to no progress.
In the 60s, the Northern Xiongnu resumed hostilities as they attempted to expand their influence into the Western Regions and launched raids on the Han borders. In 73, the Han responded by sending Dou Gu and Geng Chong to lead a great expedition against the Northern Xiongnu in the Tarim Basin. The expedition, which saw the exploits of the famed general, Ban Chao, was initially successful, but the Han had to temporarily withdraw in 75 due to matters back home. Ban Chao remained behind and maintained Chinese influence over the Western Regions before his death in 102.<ref name=":0" />Template:Sfn
For the next decade, the Northern Xiongnu had to endure famines largely due to locust plagues. In 87, they suffered a major defeat to the Xianbei, who killed their chanyu Youliu and took his skin as a trophy. With the Northern Xiongnu in disarray, the Han general, Dou Xian launched an expedition and crushed them at the Battle of the Altai Mountains in 89. After another Han attack in 91, the Northern Chanyu fled with his followers to the northwest, and was not seen again, while those that remained behind surrendered to the Han.<ref name=":0" />
In 94, dissatisfied with the newly appointed chanyu, the surrendered Northern Xiongnu rebelled and acclaimed Fenghou as their chanyu, who led them to flee outside the border. However, the separatist regime continued to face famines and the growing threat of the Xianbei, prompting 10,000 of them to return to Han in 96. Fenghou later sent envoys to Han intending to submit as a vassal but was rejected. The Northern Xiongnu were scattered, with most of them being absorbed by the Xianbei. In 118, a defeated Fenghou brought around 100 followers to surrender to Han.<ref name=":0" />
Remnants of the Northern Xiongnu held out in the Tarim Basin as they allied themselves with the Nearer Jushi Kingdom and captured Yiwu in 119. By 126, they were subjugated by the Han general, Ban Yong, while a branch led by a "Huyan King" continued to resist. The Huyan King was last mentioned in 151 when he launched an attack on Yiwu but was driven away by Han forces. According to the fifth-century Book of Wei, the remnants of Northern Chanyu's tribe settled as Yueban, near Kucha and subjugated the Wusun; while the rest fled across the Altai Mountains towards Kangju in Transoxania. It states that this group later became the Hephthalites.<ref>Book of Wei Vol. 102 (in Chinese)</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref>
Southern Xiongnu
[edit].jpg){kind=link}
Coincidentally, the Southern Xiongnu were plagued by natural disasters and misfortunes—in addition to the threat posed by Punu. Consequently, in 50 AD, the Southern Xiongnu submitted to tributary relations with Han China. The system of tribute was considerably tightened by the Han, to keep the Southern Xiongnu under control. The Chanyu was ordered to establish his court in the Meiji district of Xihe Commandery and the Southern Xiongnu were resettled in eight frontier commanderies. At the same time, large numbers of Chinese were also resettled in these commanderies, in mixed Han-Xiongnu settlements. Economically, the Southern Xiongnu became reliant on trade with the Han and annual subsidies from the Chinese court.
The Southern Xiongnu served as Han auxiliaries to defend the northern borders from nomadic forces and even played a role in defeating the Northern Xiongnu. However, with the fall of their northern counterpart, the Southern Xiongnu continued to suffer the brunt of raids, this time by the Xianbei people of the steppe. In addition to the poor climate and living conditions of the frontiers, the Chinese court would also interfere in the Southern Xiongnu's politics and install chanyus loyal to the Han. As a result, the Southern Xiongnu often rebelled, at times joining forces with the Wuhuan and receiving support from the Xianbei.
During the late 2nd century AD, the Chanyu began sending his people to deal with the Han's internal matters; first against the Yellow Turban Rebellion and then another rebellion in Hebei in 188. Many of the Xiongnu feared that it would set a precedent for unending military service to the Han court. At the time, another Han vassal, the Xiuchuge people had revolted in Bingzhou and killed the provincial inspector. Subsequently, a rebellious faction among the Southern Xiongnu allied with the Xiuchuge and killed the Chanyu as well. The Han court appointed his son, Yufuluo, entitled Chizhi Shizhu (Template:Lang), to succeed him, but he was expelled from his territory by the rebels.
Yufuluo travelled to Luoyang to seek aid from the Han court, but the court was in disorder from the clash between Grand General He Jin and the eunuchs, and the intervention of the warlord Dong Zhuo. The Chanyu subsequently settled down with his followers around Pingyang, east of the Fen River in Shanxi. In 195, he died and was succeeded as chanyu by his brother Huchuquan. Meanwhile, the rebels initially elected their own chanyu, but after he died just a year into his reign, they left the position vacant and had an elderly nominal king put in his place. With the Southern Xiongnu in disarray, many of the tribes opted to distance themselves from the ongoing Han civil war. Yufuluo's group and the Xiuchuge were drawn into the conflict from time to time before they were all subdued by the warlord Cao Cao.<ref name=":0">Template:Cite book</ref>
The Southern Xiongnu upheaval caused several frontier commanderies such as Shuofang and Yunzhong to be lost to hostile tribes, prompting Cao Cao to abolish and abandon them. In 216, he detained Huchuquan in the city of Ye and reorganized the last vestiges of the Southern Xiongnu into the Five Divisions (Left, Right, South, North and Centre) around Taiyuan Commandery in modern-day Shanxi, bringing them closer to the Chinese court's influence. The office of chanyu remained with Huchuquan at Ye until his death, after which it became vacant, while the Five Divisions were placed under the supervision of his uncle, Qubei. Each division was led by a local chief, who in turn was under the surveillance of a Chinese resident. This was aimed at preventing the tribes in Shanxi from engaging in rebellion, and also allowed Cao Cao to use them as auxiliaries in his cavalry.Template:Sfn
Descendants and later states in northern China
[edit]Fang Xuanling's Book of Jin lists nineteen Xiongnu tribes that resettled within the Great Wall: Chuge (屠各), Xianzhi (鮮支), Koutou (寇頭), Wutan (烏譚), Chile (赤勒), Hanzhi (捍蛭), Heilang (黑狼), Chisha (赤沙), Yugang (鬱鞞), Weisuo (萎莎), Tutong (禿童), Bomie (勃蔑), Qiangqu (羌渠), Helai (賀賴), Zhongqin (鐘跂), Dalou (大樓), Yongqu (雍屈), Zhenshu (真樹) and Lijie (力羯). Among the nineteen tribes, the Chuge, also known as the Xiuchuge, were the most honored and prestigious.<ref>Template:Cite book Vol. 97</ref>
With the fall of the Southern Xiongnu state, the Xiongnu name gradually lost its unifying influence among its descendants, only ever invoked for political and symbolic purposes or as a generic label for tribes that did not belong to one of the major ethnic groups at the time. In Bingzhou, the Chuge identity held more weight than that of the Xiongnu among the Five Divisions, while those excluded from the group mingled with tribes from various ethnicities and were referred to as "hu" or other vague terms for the non-Chinese. Many of them began adopting Chinese family names such as Liu, which was prevalent among the Five Divisions.Template:Sfn
Nonetheless, the Xiongnu are classified as one of the "Five Barbarians" of the Sixteen Kingdoms period. The Han-Zhao and Helian Xia dynasties were both founded by rulers on the basis of their Xiongnu ancestry. The Northern Liang, established by the Lushuihu, is sometimes categorized as a Xiongnu state in recent historiographies. Shi Le, the founder of the Later Zhao dynasty, was a descendant of the Xiongnu Qiangqu tribe, although by his time, he and his people had become a separate ethnic group known as the Jie.
Han-Zhao dynasty (304–329)
[edit]Han (304–319)
[edit].jpg){kind=link}
Eventually, the Five Divisions grew weary of subservience and attempted to assert their own power. The Commander of the Left Division, Liu Bao briefly unified them during the mid-3rd century before the Cao Wei and the Western Jin courts intervened and forced them back into five. To further ensure their loyalty, nobles of the Five Divisions had to send their children to the Chinese capital as hostages, where they became accustomed to Chinese Confucian teachings and culture. They were even allowed to hold government offices under the Jin, but their status remained low compared to their Chinese peers. Amidst the War of the Eight Princes in 304, as Jin authority was collapsing in northern China, the Five Divisions took the opportunity to rebel.
Liu Yuan, the son of Liu Bao and a general serving under one of the Jin princes, was offered by the Five Divisions to lead their rebellion. After deceiving his prince, Liu Yuan returned to Bingzhou and was acclaimed as the Grand Chanyu. Later that year, he declared himself the King of Han. Liu Yuan and his family members were Chuge people, but he also claimed to be a direct descendant of the Southern Xiongnu chanyus and depicted his state as a continuation of the Han dynasty, citing that his alleged ancestors were married to Han princesses through heqin.<ref name=":0" />Template:Sfn He adopted the Chinese ruling system and allowed the Han Chinese and non-Chinese tribes to serve under him. In 308, he elevated his title to Emperor of Han, and in 309, he settled his capital at Pingyang.
The Western Jin, devastated by war and natural disasters, was unable to stop the growing threat of the Han. A few months after Liu Cong took the Han throne, the Jin imperial army was annihilated by his forces in 311. Soon, the Han descended upon the Jin capital Luoyang, sacking the city and capturing Emperor Huai of Jin in an event known as the Disaster of Yongjia. In 316, the Jin restoration in Chang'an, headed by Emperor Min, was also crushed by the Han. After the fall of Chang'an, the remnants of the Jin south of the Yangtze river at Jiankang re-established themselves as the Eastern Jin dynasty in 318.Template:Sfn
Despite military success, the Han's imperial authority was limited. They suffered from internal strife under Liu Cong, who was described as a cruel and dissolute ruler. Faced with stern opposition from his own ministers, he greatly empowered his consort kins and eunuchs to counter them, throwing the Han court into a power struggle which ended in a brutal purge. Liu Cong also failed to constrain Shi Le, a general of Jie ethnicity who effectively held the eastern parts of the empire. After Liu Cong's death in 318, the consort kin, Jin Zhun massacred the imperial family in Pingyang before he was defeated by a combined force led by Liu Cong's cousin, Liu Yao, and Shi Le.
Former Zhao (319–329)
[edit]During Jin Zhun's rebellion, the Han loyalists that escaped the massacre acclaimed Liu Yao as the new emperor. In 319, he moved the capital from Pingyang to his base in Chang'an and renamed the dynasty as Zhao. Unlike his predecessors, Liu Yao appealed more to his Xiongnu ancestry by honouring Modu Chanyu and distancing himself from the state's initial positioning of Han restoration. However, this was not a break from Liu Yuan, as he continued to honor Liu Yuan and Liu Cong posthumously; it is hence known to historians collectively as Han-Zhao. That same year, Shi Le proclaimed independence and formed his own state of Zhao, challenging Liu Yao for hegemony over northern China. For this reason, Han-Zhao is also known to historians as the Former Zhao to distinguish it from Shi Le's Later Zhao.
Liu Yao retained control over the Guanzhong region and expanded his domain westward by campaigning against remnants of the Jin, Former Liang and Chouchi. Eventually, Liu Yao led his army to fight Later Zhao for control over Luoyang but was captured by Shi Le's forces in battle and executed in 329. Chang'an soon fell to Later Zhao and the last of Former Zhao's forces were destroyed. Thus ended the Han-Zhao dynasty; northern China would be dominated by the Later Zhao for the next 20 years.Template:Sfn The Chuge people would remain a prominent ethnic group in northern China for the next two centuries.
Tiefu tribe and Helian Xia dynasty (309–431)
[edit]
The chieftains of the Tiefu tribe were descendants of Qubei and were related to another tribe, the Dugu. Based on their name, which meant a person whose father was a Xiongnu and mother was a Xianbei, the Tiefu had mingled with the Xianbei, and records refer to them as "Wuhuan", which by the 4th-century had become a generic term for miscellaneous hu tribes with Donghu elements.Template:Sfn In 309, their chieftain, Liu Hu rebelled against the Western Jin in Shanxi but was driven out to Shuofang Commandery in the Ordos Loop. The Tiefu resided there for most of their existence, often as a vassal to their stronger neighbours before their power was destroyed by the Northern Wei dynasty in 392.
Liu Bobo, a surviving member of the Tiefu, went into exile and eventually offered his services to the Qiang-led Later Qin. He was assigned to guard Shuofang, but in 407, angered by Qin holding peace talks with the Northern Wei, he rebelled and founded a state known as the Helian Xia dynasty. Bobo strongly affirmed his Xiongnu lineage; his state name of "Xia" was based on the claim that the Xiongnu were descendants of the Xia dynasty, and he later changed his family name from "Liu" (劉) to the more Xiongnu-like "Helian" (赫連), believing it inappropriate to follow his matrilineal line from the Han. Helian Bobo placed the Later Qin in a perpetual state of warfare and greatly contributed to its decline. In 418, he conquered the Guanzhong region from the Eastern Jin dynasty after the Jin destroyed Qin the previous year.
After Helian Bobo's death in 425, the Xia quickly declined due to pressure from the Northern Wei. In 428, the emperor, Helian Chang and capital were both captured by Wei forces. His brother, Helian Ding succeeded him and conquered the Western Qin in 431, but that same year, he was ambushed and imprisoned by the Tuyuhun while attempting a campaign against Northern Liang. The Xia was at its end, and the following year, Helian Ding was sent to Wei where he was executed.
Tongwancheng (meaning "Unite All Nations"), was one of the capitals of the Xia that was built during the reign of Helian Bobo. The ruined city was discovered in 1996<ref>Template:Citation</ref> and the State Council designated it as a cultural relic under top state protection. The repair of the Yong'an Platform, where Helian Bobo reviewed parading troops, was completed and restoration on the Template:Convert tall turret follows.<ref>Template:Citation</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>
Juqu clan and Northern Liang dynasty (401–460)
[edit]Template:Main The Juqu clan were a Lushuihu family that founded the Northern Liang dynasty in modern-day Gansu in 397. Recent historiographies often classify the Northern Liang as a "Xiongnu" state, but there is still ongoing debate on the exact origin of the Lushuihu. A leading theory is that the Lushuihu were descendants of the Lesser Yuezhi that had intermingled with the Qiang people, but based on the fact that the Juqu's ancestors once served the Xiongnu empire, the Lushuihu could still be considered a branch of the Xiongnu. Regardless, contemporaneous records treat the Lushuihu as a distinct ethnic group.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>Template:Sfn The Northern Liang was known for its propagation of Buddhism in Gansu through their construction of Buddhist sites such as the Tiantishan and Mogao caves, and for being the last of the so-called Sixteen Kingdoms after it was conquered by the Northern Wei dynasty in 439.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref> There was also the Northern Liang of Gaochang, which existed between 442 and 460.
Significance
[edit]The Xiongnu confederation was unusually long-lived for a steppe empire. The purpose of raiding the Central Plain was not simply for goods, but to force the Central Plain polity to pay regular tribute. The power of the Xiongnu ruler was based on his control of Han tribute which he used to reward his supporters. The Han and Xiongnu empires rose at the same time because the Xiongnu state depended on Han tribute. A major Xiongnu weakness was the custom of lateral succession. If a dead ruler's son was not old enough to take command, power passed to the late ruler's brother. This worked in the first generation but could lead to civil war in the second generation. The first time this happened, in 60 BC, the weaker party adopted what Barfield calls the 'inner frontier strategy.' They moved south and submitted to the dominant Central Plain regime and then used the resources obtained from their overlord to defeat the Northern Xiongnu and re-establish the empire. The second time this happened, around 47 AD, the strategy failed. The southern ruler was unable to defeat the northern ruler and the Xiongnu remained divided.Template:Sfn
Ethnolinguistic originsTemplate:Anchor
[edit]The Xiongnu empire is widely thought to have been multiethnic.<ref name="JLEE" /> There are several theories on the ethnolinguistic identity of the Xiongnu, though there is no consensus among scholars as to what language was spoken by the Xiongnu elite.<ref>Template:Citation</ref>
Proposed link to the Huns
[edit]| Pronunciation of 匈奴 | |
|---|---|
| Old Chinese (318 BC): | Template:IPA |
| Eastern Han Chinese: | Template:IPA |
| Middle Chinese: | Template:IPA |
| Modern Mandarin: | Template:IPAc-cmn |
| Template:Ubl | |
The Xiongnu-Hun hypothesis was originally proposed by the 18th-century French historian Joseph de Guignes, who noticed that ancient Chinese scholars had referred to members of tribes which were associated with the Xiongnu by names which were similar to the name "Hun", albeit with varying Chinese characters. Étienne de la Vaissière has shown that, in the Sogdian script used in the so-called "Sogdian Ancient Letters", both the Xiongnu and the Huns were referred to as the γwn (xwn), which indicates that the two names were synonymous.<ref name="vaissiere2006"/> Although the theory that the Xiongnu were the precursors of the Huns as they were later known in Europe is now accepted by many scholars, it has yet to become a consensus view. The identification with the Huns may either be incorrect or it may be an oversimplification (as would appear to be the case with a proto-Mongol people, the Rouran, who have sometimes been linked to the Avars of Central Europe).
Iranian theories
[edit]
Most scholars agree that the Xiongnu elite may have been initially of Sogdian origin, while later switching to a Turkic language.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> Harold Walter Bailey proposed an Iranian origin of the Xiongnu, recognizing all of the earliest Xiongnu names of the 2nd century BC as being of the Iranian type.Template:Sfn Central Asian scholar Christopher I. Beckwith notes that the Xiongnu name could be a cognate of Scythian, Saka and Sogdia, corresponding to a name for Eastern Iranian Scythians.Template:Sfn<ref name="Beckwith405">Template:Harvnb: "Accordingly, the transcription now read as Hsiung- nu may have been pronounced * Soγdâ, * Soγlâ, * Sak(a)dâ, or even * Skla(C)da, etc."</ref> According to Beckwith the Xiongnu could have contained a leading Iranian component when they started out, but more likely they had earlier been subjects of an Iranian people and learned the Iranian nomadic model from them.Template:Sfn
In the 1994 UNESCO-published History of Civilizations of Central Asia, its editor János Harmatta claims that the royal tribes and kings of the Xiongnu bore Iranian names, that all Xiongnu words noted by the Chinese can be explained from a Scythian language, and that it is therefore clear that the majority of Xiongnu tribes spoke an Eastern Iranian language.<ref name="Harmatta488"/>
According to a study by Alexander Savelyev and Choongwon Jeong, published in 2020 in the journal Evolutionary Human Sciences, "The predominant part of the Xiongnu population is likely to have spoken Turkic". However, important cultural, technological and political elements may have been transmitted by Eastern Iranian-speaking Steppe nomads: "Arguably, these Iranian-speaking groups were assimilated over time by the predominant Turkic-speaking part of the Xiongnu population".<ref name="Savelyev & Jeong, 2020">Template:Cite journal File:CC-BY icon.svg Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. "Such a distribution of Xiongnu words may be an indication that both Turkic and Eastern Iranian-speaking groups were present among the Xiongnu in the earlier period of their history. Etymological analysis shows that some crucial components in the Xiongnu political, economic and cultural package, including dairy pastoralism and elements of state organization, may have been imported by the Eastern Iranians. Arguably, these Iranian-speaking groups were assimilated over time by the predominant Turkic-speaking part of the Xiongnu population. ... The genetic profile of published Xiongnu individuals speaks against the Yeniseian hypothesis, assuming that modern Yeniseian speakers (i.e. Kets) are representative of the ancestry components in the historical Yeniseian speaking groups in southern Siberia. In contrast to the Iron Age populations listed in Table 2, Kets do not have the Iranian-related ancestry component but harbour a strong genetic affinity with Samoyedic-speaking neighbours, such as Selkups (Jeong et al., 2018, 2019)."</ref>
Yeniseian theories
[edit]
Lajos Ligeti was the first to suggest that the Xiongnu spoke a Yeniseian language. In the early 1960s Edwin Pulleyblank was the first to expand upon this idea with credible evidence. The Yeniseian theory proposes that the Jie, a western Xiongnu people, spoke a Yeniseian language. Hyun Jin Kim notes that the 7th century AD Chinese conpendium, Jin Shu, contains a transliterated song of Jie origin, which appears to be Yeniseian. This song has led researchers Pulleyblank and Vovin to argue for a Yeniseian Jie dominant minority, that ruled over the other Xiongnu ethnicities, such as Iranian and Turkic people. Kim has stated that the dominant Xiongnu language was likely Turkic or Yeniseian, but has cautioned that the Xiongnu were definitely a multi-ethnic society.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>
Pulleybank and D. N. Keightley asserted that the Xiongnu titles "were originally Siberian words but were later borrowed by the Turkic and Mongolic peoples".Template:Sfn Titles such as tarqan, tegin and kaghan were also inherited from the Xiongnu language and are possibly of Yeniseian origin. For example, the Xiongnu word for "heaven" is theorized to come from Proto-Yeniseian *tɨŋVr.<ref name="Vovin">Template:Cite journal</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref>
Vocabulary from Xiongnu inscriptions sometimes appears to have Yeniseian cognates which were used by Vovin to support his theory that the Xiongnu has a large Yeniseian component, examples of proposed cognates include words such as Xiongnu kʷala 'son' and Ket qalek 'younger son', Xiongnu sakdak 'boot' and Ket sagdi 'boot', Xiongnu gʷawa "prince" and Ket gij "prince", Xiongnu "attij" 'wife' and proto-Yeniseian "alrit", Ket "alit" and Xiongnu dar "north" compared to Yugh tɨr "north".<ref name="Vovin"/><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> Pulleyblank also argued that because Xiongnu words appear to have clusters with r and l, in the beginning of the word it is unlikely to be of Turkic origin, and instead believed that most vocabulary we have mostly resemble Yeniseian languages.<ref>Template:Cite thesis</ref>
Alexander Vovin also wrote, that some names of horses in the Xiongnu language appear to be Turkic words with Yeniseian prefixes.<ref name="Vovin"/>
An analysis by Savelyev and Jeong (2020) has cast doubt on the Yeniseian theory. If assuming that the ancient Yeniseians were represented by modern Ket people, who are more genetically similar to Samoyedic speakers, the Xiongnu do not display a genetic affinity for Yeniseian peoples.<ref name="Savelyev & Jeong, 2020"/> A review by Wilson (2023) argues that the presence of Yeniseian-speakers among the multi-ethnic Xiongnu should not be rejected, and that "Yeniseian-speaking peoples must have played a more prominent (than heretofore recognized) role in the history of Eurasia during the first millennium of the Common Era".<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>
Turkic theories
[edit]
According to a study by Alexander Savelyev and Choongwon Jeong, published in 2020 in the journal Evolutionary Human Sciences, "The predominant part of the Xiongnu population is likely to have spoken Turkic". However, genetic studies found a mixture of haplogroups from western and eastern Eurasian origins that suggested large genetic diversity, and possibly multiple origins of Xiongnu elites. The Turkic-related component may be brought by eastern Eurasian genetic substratum.<ref name="Savelyev & Jeong, 2020"/>
Other proponents of a Turkic language theory include E.H. Parker, Jean-Pierre Abel-Rémusat, Julius Klaproth, Gustaf John Ramstedt, Annemarie von Gabain,<ref name="Savelyev & Jeong, 2020" /> and Charles Hucker.Template:Sfn André Wink states that the Xiongnu probably spoke an early form of Turkic; even if Xiongnu were not "Turks" nor Turkic-speaking, they were in close contact with Turkic-speakers very early on.Template:Sfn Craig Benjamin sees the Xiongnu as either proto-Turks or proto-Mongols who possibly spoke a language related to the Dingling.<ref>Craig Benjamin (2007, 49), In: Hyun Jin Kim, The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe. Cambridge University Press. 2013. page 176.</ref>
Chinese sources link several Turkic peoples to the Xiongnu:
- According to the Book of Zhou, History of the Northern Dynasties, Tongdian, New Book of Tang, the Göktürks and the ruling Ashina clan was a component of the Xiongnu confederation,<ref name="Zhou50">Linghu Defen et al., Zhoushu, vol. 50 quote: "突厥者，蓋匈奴之別種，姓阿史那氏。"</ref><ref>Beishi "vol. 99 - section Tujue" quote: "突厥者，其先居西海之右，獨為部落，蓋匈奴之別種也。" translation: "The Tujue, their ancestors dwelt on the right bank of the Western Sea; a lone tribe, probably a separate branch of the Xiongnu"</ref><ref>Golden, Peter B. (August 2018). "The Ethnogonic Tales of the Türks". The Medieval History Journal, 21 (2): p. 298 of 291–327, fn. 36. quote: "'Western Sea' (xi hai 西海) has many possible meanings designating different bodies of water from the Mediterranean, Caspian and Aral Seas to Kuku-nor. In the Sui era (581–618) it was viewed as being near Byzantium (Sinor, 'Legendary Origin': 226). Taşağıl, Gök-Türkler, vol. 1: 95, n. 553 identies it with Etsin-Gol, which is more likely."</ref><ref name = "tongdian197">Du You, Tongdian vol. 197 quote: "突厥之先，平涼今平涼郡雜胡也，蓋匈奴之別種，姓阿史那氏。"</ref><ref>Xin Tangshu, vol. 215A. "突厥阿史那氏, 蓋古匈奴北部也." "The Ashina family of the Turk probably were the northern tribes of the ancient Xiongnu." quoted and translated in Xu (2005), Historical Development of the Pre-Dynastic Khitan, University of Helsinki, 2005</ref>
- However, the Ashina-surnamed Göktürks were also stated to be they were "mixed barbarians" (Template:Wikt-lang; záhú) who fled from Pingliang (now in modern Gansu province, China).<ref> Wei Zheng et al., Suishu, vol. 84 quote: "突厥之先，平涼雜胡也，姓阿史那氏。"</ref><ref name= "tongdian197"/> or from an obscure Suo state (索國), north of the Xiongnu.<ref>Zhoushu, "vol. 50" "或云突厥之先出於索國，在匈奴之北。"</ref><ref>Beishi "vol. 99 - section Tujue" quote: "又曰突厥之先，出於索國，在匈奴之北。"</ref>
- Uyghur Khagans claimed descent from the Xiongnu (according to Chinese history Weishu, the founder of the Uyghur Khaganate was descended from a Xiongnu ruler).Template:Sfn<ref>Wei Shou et al., Book of Wei vol. 103 - section Gaoche quote: "高車，蓋古赤狄之餘種也，初號為狄歷，北方以為勑勒，諸夏以為高車、丁零。其語略與匈奴同而時有小異，或云其先匈奴之甥也。其種有狄氏、袁紇氏、斛律氏、解批氏、護骨氏、異奇斤氏。" translation: "The Gaoche are probably remnants of the ancient Red Di. Initially they had been called Dili. Northerners consider them Chile. The various Xia (aka Chinese) consider them Gaoche Dingling (High-Cart Dingling). Their language, in brief, and Xiongnu [language] are the same yet occasionally there are small differences. Some say that they [Gaoche] are the sororal nephews/sons-in-laws of the Xiongnu of yore. Their tribes (種) are Di, Yuanhe (aka Uyghurs), Hulu, Jiepi, Hugu, Yiqijin."</ref><ref>Xin Tangshu vol 217A - Huihu quote: "回紇，其先匈奴也，俗多乘高輪車，元魏時亦號高車部，或曰敕勒，訛為鐵勒。" translation: "Huihe, their ancestors were the Xiongnu; because they customarily drove carts with high-wheels and many spokes, in Yuan Wei's they were also called Gaoche (High-Cart), or also called Chile, mistakenly rendered as Tiele."</ref>
- The Book of Wei states that the Yueban descended from remnants of the Northern Xiongnu chanyu's tribe and that Yueban's language and customs resembled Gaoche (高車),<ref>Weishu, "vol. 102 Wusun, Shule, & Yueban" quote: "悅般國，…… 其先，匈奴北單于之部落也。…… 其風俗言語與高車同"</ref> another name of the Tiele.
- The Book of Jin lists 19 southern Xiongnu tribes who entered Former Yan's borders, the 14th being the Alat (Ch. 賀賴 Helai ~ 賀蘭 Helan ~ 曷剌 Hela); Alat being glossed "piebald horse" (Ch. 駁馬 ~ 駮馬 Boma) in Old Turkic.<ref>Jinshu vol. 97 Four Barbarians - Xiongnu"</ref><ref>Yuanhe Maps and Records of Prefectures and Counties vol. 4 quote: "北人呼駮馬為賀蘭"</ref><ref>Du You. Tongdian. Vol. 200. "突厥謂駮馬為曷剌，亦名曷剌國。"</ref>
However, Chinese sources also ascribe Xiongnu origins to the Para-Mongolic-speaking Kumo Xi and Khitans.<ref name= "Lee2016p105"/>
Mongolic theories
[edit]
Mongolian and other scholars have suggested that the Xiongnu spoke a language related to the Mongolic languages.<ref>Ts. Baasansuren "The scholar who showed the true Mongolia to the world", Summer 2010 vol.6 (14) Mongolica, pp.40</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref> Mongolian archaeologists proposed that the Slab Grave Culture people were the ancestors of the Xiongnu, and some scholars have suggested that the Xiongnu may have been the ancestors of the Mongols.<ref name="Tumen"/> Nikita Bichurin considered Xiongnu and Xianbei to be two subgroups (or dynasties) of but one same ethnicity.<ref name="info">N.Bichurin "Collection of information on the peoples who inhabited Central Asia in ancient times", 1950, p. 227</ref>
According to the Book of Song, the Rourans, which the Book of Wei identified as offspring of Proto-Mongolic<ref>Pulleyblank, Edwin G. (2000). "Ji 姬 and Jiang 姜: The Role of Exogamic Clans in the Organization of the Zhou Polity", Early China. p. 20</ref> Donghu people,<ref>Wei Shou. Book of Wei. vol. 91 "蠕蠕，東胡之苗裔也，姓郁久閭氏" tr. "Rúrú, offsprings of Dōnghú, surnamed Yùjiŭlǘ"</ref> possessed the alternative name(s) 大檀 Dàtán "Tatar" and/or 檀檀 Tántán "Tartar" and according to the Book of Liang, "they also constituted a separate branch of the Xiongnu".<ref>Liangshu Vol. 54 txt: "芮芮國，蓋匈奴別種。" tr: "Ruìruì state, possibly a Xiongnu's separate branch"</ref><ref>Golden, Peter B. "Some Notes on the Avars and Rouran", in The Steppe Lands and the World beyond Them. Ed. Curta, Maleon. Iași (2013). pp. 54-55</ref> The Old Book of Tang mentioned twenty Shiwei tribes,<ref>Liu Xu et al. Old Book of Tang "vol. 199 section: Shiwei"</ref> which other Chinese sources (the Book of Sui and the New Book of Tang) associated with the Khitans,<ref name="Elina-Qian 2005 p. 173-178">Xu Elina-Qian (2005). Historical Development of the Pre-Dynastic Khitan. University of Helsinki. p. 173-178</ref> another people who in turn descended from the Xianbei<ref>Xu Elina-Qian (2005). Historical Development of the Pre-Dynastic Khitan. University of Helsinki. p. 99. quote: "According to Gai Zhiyong's study, Jishou is identical with Qishou, the earliest ancestor of the Khitan; and Shihuai is identical to Tanshihuai, the Xianbei supreme chief in the period of the Eastern Han (25-220). Therefore, from the sentence "His ancestor was Jish[ou] who was derived from Shihuai" in the above inscription, it can be simply seen that the Khitan originated from the Xianbei. Since the excavated inscription on memorial tablet can be regarded as a firsthand historical source, this piece of information is quite reliable."</ref> and were also associated with the Xiongnu.<ref>Xue Juzheng et al. Old History of the Five Dynasties vol. 137 quote: "契丹者，古匈奴之種也。" translation: "The Khitans, a kind of Xiongnu of yore."</ref> While the Xianbei, Khitans, and Shiwei are generally believed to be predominantly Mongolic- and Para-Mongolic-speaking,<ref name="Elina-Qian 2005 p. 173-178"/><ref>Schönig, Claus. (27 January 2006) "Turko-Mongolic relations" in Janhunen (ed.) The Mongolic Languages. Routledge. p. 393.</ref><ref>Shimunek, Andrew. "Early Serbi-Mongolic-Tungusic lexical contact: Jurchen numerals from the 室韦 Shirwi (Shih-wei) in North China". Philology of the Grasslands: Essays in Mongolic, Turkic, and Tungusic Studies, Edited by Ákos Bertalan Apatóczky et al. (Leiden: Brill). Retrieved 22 September 2019. quote: "Asdemonstrated by Ratchnevsky (1966: 231), the Shirwi confederation was a multiethnic, multilingual confederation of Tungusic-speaking Mo-ho 靺鞨 people (i.e. ancestors of the Jurchen), the Meng-wa 蒙瓦 ~ Meng-wu 蒙兀, whom Pelliot (1928) and others have shown were Proto-Mongolic speakers, and other groups. The dominant group among the Shirwi undoubtedly were ethnolinguistic descendants of the Serbi (鮮卑 Hsien-pei), and spoke a language closely related to Kitan and more distantly related to Mongolic."</ref> yet Xianbei were stated to descend from the Donghu, whom Sima Qian distinguished from the Xiongnu.<ref>Shiji "vol. 110: Account of the Xiongnu" quote: "東胡初輕冒頓，不爲備。及冒頓以兵至，擊，大破滅東胡王，而虜其民人及畜產。" translation: "Initially the Donghu despised Modun and were unprepared. So Modun arrived with his troops, attacked, routed [the Donghu] and killed Donghu king; then [Modun] captured his people as well as livestock."</ref><ref>Book of Later Han. "Vol. 90 section Xianbei". text: "鮮卑者, 亦東胡之支也, 别依鮮卑山, 故因為號焉. 漢初, 亦為冒頓所破, 遠竄遼東塞." Xu (2005:24)'s translation: "The Xianbei who were a branch of the Donghu, relied upon the Xianbei Mountains. Therefore, they were called the Xianbei. At the beginning of the Han Dynasty (206 B.C.-A.D. 220), (they) were defeated by Maodun, and then fled in disorder to Liaodong beyond the northern border of China Proper"</ref><ref>Xu Elina-Qian (2005). Historical Development of the Pre-Dynastic Khitan. University of Helsinki. p. 24-25</ref> (notwithstanding Sima Qian's inconsistency<ref name = "hu proper"/><ref name = "ZGC"/><ref name = "xiongnu hu"/>Template:Sfn). Additionally, Chinese chroniclers routinely ascribed Xiongnu origins to various nomadic groups: for examples, Xiongnu ancestry was ascribed to Para-Mongolic-speaking Kumo Xi as well as Turkic-speaking Göktürks and Tiele;<ref name = "Lee2016p105">Template:Cite journal</ref>
Genghis Khan refers to the time of Modu Chanyu as "the remote times of our Chanyu" in his letter to Daoist Qiu Chuji.<ref name="Howorth">Template:Cite book</ref> Sun and moon symbol of Xiongnu that discovered by archaeologists is similar to Mongolian Soyombo symbol.<ref>Template:Cite web</ref><ref>Template:Cite web</ref><ref>Elite Xiongnu Burials at the Periphery (Miller et al. 2009)</ref>
Multiple ethnicities
[edit]
Since the early 19th century, a number of Western scholars have proposed a connection between various language families or subfamilies and the language or languages of the Xiongnu. Albert Terrien de Lacouperie considered them to be multi-component groups.Template:Sfn Many scholars believe the Xiongnu confederation was a mixture of different ethno-linguistic groups, and that their main language (as represented in the Chinese sources) and its relationships have not yet been satisfactorily determined.Template:Sfn Kim rejects "old racial theories or even ethnic affiliations" in favour of the "historical reality of these extensive, multiethnic, polyglot steppe empires".<ref>Hyun Jin Kim, The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe. Template:ISBN. Cambridge University Press. 2013. page 31.</ref>
Chinese sources link the Tiele people and Ashina to the Xiongnu, not all Turkic peoples. According to the Book of Zhou and the History of the Northern Dynasties, the Ashina clan was a component of the Xiongnu confederation,<ref name="Zhou502">Linghu Defen et al., Book of Zhou, Vol. 50. Template:In lang</ref><ref name="Northern992">Li Yanshou (Template:Lang), History of the Northern Dynasties, Vol. 99. Template:In lang</ref> but this connection is disputed,Template:Sfn and according to the Book of Sui and the Tongdian, they were "mixed nomads" (Template:Zh) from Pingliang.<ref name="Sui84">Wei Zheng et al., Book of Sui, Vol. 84. Template:In lang</ref><ref name="Tong197">Template:Cite book</ref> The Ashina and Tiele may have been separate ethnic groups who mixed with the Xiongnu.<ref name="ethnic">Template:Cite web</ref> Indeed, Chinese sources link many nomadic peoples (hu; see Wu Hu) on their northern borders to the Xiongnu, just as Greco-Roman historiographers called Avars and Huns "Scythians". The Greek cognate of Tourkia (Template:Langx) was used by the Byzantine emperor and scholar Constantine VII in his book De Administrando Imperio,<ref>Template:Cite book According to Constantine Porphyrogenitus, writing in his De Administrando Imperio (ca. 950 AD) "Patzinakia, the Pecheneg realm, stretches west as far as the Siret River (or even the Eastern Carpathian Mountains), and is four days distant from Tourkia (i.e. Hungary)."</ref><ref name="PrinzingSalamon1999">Template:Cite book</ref> though in his use, "Turks" always referred to Magyars.<ref name="Howorth2008">Template:Cite book</ref> Such archaizing was a common literary topos, and implied similar geographic origins and nomadic lifestyle but not direct filiation.<ref>Template:Harvtxt</ref>
Some Uyghurs claimed descent from the Xiongnu (according to Chinese history Weishu, the founder of the Uyghur Khaganate was descended from a Xiongnu ruler),Template:Sfn but many contemporary scholars do not consider the modern Uyghurs to be of direct linear descent from the old Uyghur Khaganate because modern Uyghur language and Old Uyghur languages are different.<ref name="Tursun">Template:Cite journal</ref> Rather, they consider them to be descendants of a number of people, one of them the ancient Uyghurs.<ref name="xinjiang">Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref>
In various kinds of ancient inscriptions on monuments of Munmu of Silla, it is recorded that King Munmu had Xiongnu ancestry. According to several historians, it is possible that there were tribes of Koreanic origin. There are also some Korean researchers that point out that the grave goods of Silla and of the eastern Xiongnu are alike.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>김창호, 〈문무왕릉비에 보이는 신라인의 조상인식 – 태조성한의 첨보 -〉, 《한국사연구》, 한국사연구회, 1986년</ref><ref>Template:Cite web</ref>
Language isolate theories
[edit]Turkologist Gerhard Doerfer has denied any possibility of a relationship between the Xiongnu language and any other known language, even any connection with Turkic or Mongolian.Template:Sfn
Geographic origins
[edit]The original geographic location of the Xiongnu is disputed among steppe archaeologists. Since the 1960s, the geographic origin of the Xiongnu has attempted to be traced through an analysis of Early Iron Age burial constructions. No region has been proven to have mortuary practices that clearly match those of the Xiongnu.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>
Archaeology
[edit]
In the 1920s, Pyotr Kozlov oversaw the excavation of royal tombs at the Noin-Ula burial site in northern Mongolia, dated to around the first century AD. Other Xiongnu sites have been unearthed in Inner Mongolia, such as the Ordos culture. Sinologist Otto Maenchen-Helfen has said that depictions of the Xiongnu of Transbaikalia and the Ordos commonly show individuals with West Eurasian features.Template:Sfn Iaroslav Lebedynsky said that West Eurasian depictions in the Ordos region should be attributed to a "Scythian affinity".<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>
Portraits found in the Noin-Ula excavations demonstrate other cultural evidence and influences, showing that Chinese and Xiongnu art influenced each other mutually. Some of these embroidered portraits in the Noin-Ula kurgans also depict the Xiongnu with long braided hair with wide ribbons, which is seen to be identical with the Ashina clan hair-style.<ref>Camilla Trever, "Excavations in Northern Mongolia (1924–1925)", Leningrad: J. Fedorov Printing House, 1932 [1]</ref> Well-preserved bodies in Xiongnu and pre-Xiongnu tombs in Mongolia and southern Siberia show both East Asian and West Eurasian features.<ref>The Great Empires of the Ancient World – Thomas Harrison – 2009 – page 288</ref>
Analysis of cranial remains from some sites attributed to the Xiongnu have revealed that they had dolichocephalic skulls with East Asian craniometrical features, setting them apart from neighboring populations in present-day Mongolia.Template:Sfn Russian and Chinese anthropological and craniofacial studies show that the Xiongnu were physically very heterogenous, with six different population clusters showing different degrees of West Eurasian and East Asian physical traits.<ref name="Tumen"/>
Presently, there exist four fully excavated and well documented cemeteries: Ivolga,<ref>A. V. Davydova, Ivolginskii arkheologicheskii kompleks II. Ivolginskii mogil'nik. Arkheologicheskie pamiatniki Siunnu 2 (Sankt-Peterburg 1996). А. В. Давыдова, Иволгинский археологи-ческий комплекс II. Иволгинский могильник. Археологические памятники Сюнну 2 (Санкт-Петербург 1996).</ref> Dyrestui,<ref>S. S. Miniaev, Dyrestuiskii mogil'nik. Arkheologicheskie pamiatniki Siunnu 3 (Sankt-Peterburg 1998). С. С. Миняев, Дырестуйский могильник. Археологические памятники Сюнну 3 (Санкт-Петербург 1998).</ref> Burkhan Tolgoi,<ref>Ts. Törbat, Keramika khunnskogo mogil'nika Burkhan-Tolgoi. Erdem shinzhilgeenii bichig. Arkheologi, antropologi, ugsaatan sudlal 19,2003, 82–100. Ц. Тѳрбат, Керамика хуннского могильника Бурхан-Толгой. Эрдэм шинжилгээний бичиг. Археологи, антропологи, угсаатан судлал 19, 2003, 82–100.</ref><ref>Ts. Törbat, Tamiryn Ulaan khoshuuny bulsh ba Khünnügiin ugsaatny büreldekhüünii asuudald. Tükhiin setgüül 4, 2003, 6–17. Ц. Төрбат, Тамирын Улаан хошууны булш ба Хүннүгийн угсаатны бүрэлдэхүүний асуудалд. Түүхийн сэтгүүл 4, 2003, 6–17.</ref> and Daodunzi.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref> Additionally thousands of tombs have been recorded in Transbaikalia and Mongolia.
The archaeologists at a Xiongnu cemetery in Arkhangai Province said the following:
"There is no clear indication of the ethnicity of this tomb occupant, but in a similar brick-chambered tomb of the late Eastern Han period at the same cemetery, archaeologists discovered a bronze seal with the official title that the Han government bestowed upon the leader of the Xiongnu. The excavators suggested that these brick chamber tombs all belong to the Xiongnu (Qinghai 1993)."<ref name="Lai 34–43">Template:Cite journal</ref>
Classifications of these burial sites make distinction between two prevailing type of burials: "(1) monumental ramped terrace tombs which are often flanked by smaller "satellite" burials and (2) 'circular' or 'ring' burials."<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> Some scholars consider this a division between "elite" graves and "commoner" graves. Other scholars, find this division too simplistic and not evocative of a true distinction because it shows "ignorance of the nature of the mortuary investments and typically luxuriant burial assemblages [and does not account for] the discovery of other lesser interments that do not qualify as either of these types."<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>
Genetics
[edit]Maternal lineages
[edit]
A 2003 study found that 89% of Xiongnu maternal lineages are of East Asian origin, while 11% were of West Eurasian origin. However, a 2016 study found that 37.5% of Xiongnu maternal lineages were West Eurasian, in a central Mongolian sample.<ref>Template:Cite journal "Analysis of the mitochondrial DNA, which is maternally inherited, shows that the Xiongnu remains from this Egyin Gol necropolis consist mainly of Asian lineages (89%). West Eurasian lineages makeup the rest (11%) (Keyser-Tracqui et al. (2003: 258). However, according to a more recent study of ancient human remains from central Mongolia, the Xiongnu population in cen- tral Mongolia possessed a higher frequency of western mitochondrial DNA haplotypes (37.5%) than the Xiongnu from the Egyin Gol necropolis (Rogers 2016: 78)."</ref>
According to Rogers & Kaestle (2022), these studies make clear that the Xiongnu population is extremely similar to the preceding Slab Grave population, which had a similar frequency of Eastern and Western maternal haplogroups, supporting a hypothesis of continuity from the Slab Grave period to the Xiongnu. They wrote that the bulk of the genetics research indicates that roughly 27% of Xiongnu maternal haplogroups were of West Eurasian origin, while the rest were East Asian.<ref>Template:Cite journal " The first pattern is that the slab burial mtDNA frequencies are extremely similar to those of the aggregated Xiongnu populations and relatively similar to those of the various Bronze Age Mongolian populations, strongly supporting a population continuity hypothesis for the region over these time periods (Honeychurch, 2013)"</ref>
Some examples of maternal haplogroups observed in Xiongnu specimens include D4b2b4, N9a2a, G3a3, D4a6 and D4b2b2b.Template:Sfn and U2e1.<ref>Template:Harvnb</ref>
Paternal lineages
[edit]According to Rogers & Kaestle (2022), roughly 47% of Xiongnu period remains belonged to paternal haplogroups associated with modern West Eurasians, while the rest (53%) belonged to East Asian haplogroups. They observed that this contrasts strongly with the preceding Slab Grave period, which was dominated by East Asian patrilineages. They suggest that this may reflect an aggressive expansion of people with West Eurasian paternal haplogroups, or perhaps the practice of marriage alliances or cultural networks favoring people with Western patrilines.<ref>Template:Harvnb</ref>
Some examples of paternal haplogroups in Xiongnu specimens include Q1b,<ref>Template:Cite conference (Poster abstracts p. 235; 2041F)</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal (Journal: Template:Lang Template:Transliteration [Archaeology of the western regions])</ref> C3,<ref>Template:Harvnb</ref> R1, R1b, O3a and O3a3b2,Template:Sfn R1a1a1b2a-Z94, R1a1a1b2a2-Z2124, Q1a, N1a,<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> J2a, J1a and E1b1b1a.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>
According to Lee & Kuang, the main paternal lineages of 62 Xiongnu Elite remains in the Egiin Gol valley belonged to the paternal haplogroups N1c1, Q-M242, and C-M217. One sample from Duurlig Nars belonged to R1a1 and another to C-M217. Xiongnu remains from Barkol belonged exclusively to haplogroup Q. They argue that the haplogroups C2, Q and N likely formed the major paternal haplogroups of the Xiongnu tribes, while R1a was the most common paternal haplogroup (44.5%) among neighbouring nomads from the Altai mountain, who were probably incorporated into the Xiongnu confederation and may be associated with the Jie people.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>
Autosomal ancestry
[edit]A study published in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology in October 2006 detected significant genetic continuity between the examined individuals at Egyin Gol and modern Mongolians.Template:Sfn
A genetic study published in Nature in May 2018 examined the remains of five Xiongnu.Template:Sfn The study concluded that Xiongnu confederation was genetically heterogeneous, and Xiongnu individuals belonging to two distinct groups, one being of primarily East Asian origin (associated with the earlier Slab-grave culture) and the other presenting considerable admixture levels with West Eurasian (possibly from Central Saka) sources. The evidence suggested that the Huns probably emerged through minor male-driven geneflow into the Saka through westward migrations of the Xiongnu.<ref>Template:Harvnb: "Principal Component Analyses and D-statistics suggest that the Xiongnu individuals belong to two distinct groups, one being of East Asian origin and the other presenting considerable admixture levels with West Eurasian sources... We find that Central Sakas are accepted as a source for these 'western-admixed' Xiongnu in a single-wave model. In line with this finding, no East Asian gene flow is detected compared to Central Sakas as these form a clade with respect to the East Asian Xiongnu in a D-statistic, and furthermore, cluster closely together in the PCA (Figure 2)... Overall, our data show that the Xiongnu confederation was genetically heterogeneous, and that the Huns emerged following minor male-driven East Asian gene flow into the preceding Sakas that they invaded... As such our results support the contention that the disappearance of the Inner Asian Scythians and Sakas around two thousand years ago was a cultural transition that coincided with the westward migration of the Xiongnu. This Xiongnu invasion also led to the displacement of isolated remnant groups—related to Late Bronze Age pastoralists—that had remained on the south-eastern side of the Tian Shan mountains."</ref>
A study published in November 2020 examined 60 early and late Xiongnu individuals from across Mongolia. The study found that the Xiongnu resulted from the admixture of three different clusters from the Mongolian region. The two early genetic clusters are "early Xiongnu_west" from the Altai Mountains (formed at 92% by the hybrid Eurasian Chandman ancestry, and 8% BMAC ancestry), and "early Xiongnu_rest" from the Mongolian Plateau (individuals with primarily Ulaanzuukh-Slab Grave ancestry, or mixed with "early Xiongnu_west"). The later third cluster named "late Xiongnu" has even higher heterogenity, with the continued combination of Chandman and Ulaanzuukh-Slab Grave ancestry, and additional geneflow from Sarmatian and Han Chinese sources. Their uniparental haplogroup assignments also showed heterogenetic influence on their ethnogenesis as well as their connection with Huns.<ref name="Choongwon">Template:Cite journal File:CC-BY icon.svg Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. </ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> In contrast, the later Mongols had a much higher eastern Eurasian ancestry as a whole, similar to that of modern-day Mongolic-speaking populations.<ref>Template:Cite journal </ref>
A Xiongnu remain (GD1-4) analysed in a 2024 study was found to be entirely derived from Ancient Northeast Asians without any West Eurasian-associated ancestry. The sample clustered closely with a Göktürk remain (GD1-1) from the later Turkic period.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>
Relationship between ethnicity and status among the Xiongnu
[edit].png){kind=link}
Although the Xiongnu were ethnically heterogeneous as a whole, it appears that variability was highly related to social status. Genetic heterogeneity was highest among retainers of low status, as identified by their smaller and peripheral tombs. These retainers mainly displayed ancestry related to the Chandman/Uyuk culture (characterized by a hybrid Eurasian gene pool combining the genetic profile of the Sintashta culture and Baikal hunter-gatherers (Baikal EBA)), or various combinations of Chandman/Uyuk and Ancient Northeast Asian Ulaanzuukh/Slab Grave profiles.<ref name="JLEE"/>
On the contrary, high status Xiongnu individuals tended to have less genetic diversity, and their ancestry was essentially derived from the Eastern Eurasian Ulaanzuukh/Slab Grave culture, or alternatively from the Xianbei, suggesting multiple sources for their Eastern ancestry. High Eastern ancestry was more common among high status female samples, while low status male samples tended to be more diverse and having higher Western ancestry.<ref name="JLEE"/> A likely chanyu, a male ruler of the Empire identified by his prestigious tomb, was shown to have had similar ancestry as a high status female in the "western frontiers", deriving about 39.3% Slab Grave (or Ancient Northeast Asian) genetic ancestry, 51.9% Han (or Yellow River farmers) ancestry, with the rest (8.8%) being Saka (Chandman) ancestry.<ref name="JLEE">Template:Cite journal</ref> Template:Clear
Culture
[edit]Art
[edit]
Within the Xiongnu culture more variety is visible from site to site than from "era" to "era," in terms of Chinese chronology, yet all form a whole that is distinct from that of the Han and other peoples of the non-Chinese north.Template:Sfn In some instances, the iconography cannot be used as the main cultural identifier, because art depicting animal predation is common among the steppe peoples. An example of animal predation associated with Xiongnu culture is that of a tiger carrying dead prey.Template:Sfn A similar motif appears in work from Maoqinggou, a site which is presumed to have been under Xiongnu political control but is still clearly non-Xiongnu. In the Maoqinggou example, the prey is replaced with an extension of the tiger's foot. The work also depicts a cruder level of execution; Maoqinggou work was executed in a rounder, less detailed style.Template:Sfn In its broadest sense, Xiongnu iconography of animal predation includes examples such as the gold headdress from Aluchaideng and gold earrings with a turquoise and jade inlay discovered in Xigoupan, Inner Mongolia.Template:Sfn
Xiongnu art is harder to distinguish from Saka or Scythian art. There is a similarity present in stylistic execution, but Xiongnu art and Saka art often differ in terms of iconography. Saka art does not appear to have included predation scenes, especially with dead prey, or same-animal combat. Additionally, Saka art included elements not common to Xiongnu iconography, such as winged, horned horses.Template:Sfn The two cultures also used two different kinds of bird heads. Xiongnu depictions of birds tend to have a medium-sized eye and beak, and they are also depicted with ears, while Saka birds have a pronounced eye and beak, and no ears.Template:Sfn Some scholarsTemplate:Who claim these differences are indicative of cultural differences. Scholar Sophia-Karin Psarras suggests that Xiongnu images of animal predation, specifically tiger-and-prey, are a spiritual representation of death and rebirth, and that same-animal combat is representative of the acquisition or maintenance of power.Template:Sfn
Rock art and writing
[edit]
The rock art of the Yin and Helan Mountains is dated from the 9th millennium BC to the 19th century AD. It consists mainly of engraved signs (petroglyphs) and only minimally of painted images.Template:Sfn
Chinese sources indicate that the Xiongnu did not have an ideographic form of writing like Chinese, but in the 2nd century BC, a renegade Chinese dignitary Yue "taught the Shanyu to write official letters to the Chinese court on a wooden tablet Template:Convert long, and to use a seal and large-sized folder." The same sources tell that when the Xiongnu noted down something or transmitted a message, they made cuts on a piece of wood ('ke-mu'), and they also mention a "Hu script" (vol. 110). At Noin-Ula and other Xiongnu burial sites in Mongolia and the region north of Lake Baikal, among the objects discovered during excavations conducted in 1924 and 1925 were over 20 carved characters. Most of these characters are either identical or very similar to letters of the Old Turkic alphabet of the Early Middle Ages found on the Eurasian steppes. From this, some specialists conclude that the Xiongnu used a script similar to the ancient Eurasian runiform, and that this alphabet was a basis for later Turkic writing.Template:Sfn
Religion and diet
[edit]According to the Book of Han, the Xiongnu called Heaven (天) 'Chēnglí,' (撐犁)<ref>Book of Han, Vol. 94-I, 匈奴謂天為「撐犁」，謂子為「孤塗」，單于者，廣大之貌也.</ref> a Chinese transcription of Tengri. The Xiongnu were a nomadic people. From their lifestyle of herding flocks and their horse-trade with China, it can be concluded that their diet consisted mainly of mutton, horse meat and wild geese that were shot down.
Historical evidence gives reason to believe that, from the 2nd century BC, proto-Mongol peoples (the Xiongnu, Xianbei, and Khitans) were familiar with Buddhism. Remains of Buddhist prayer beads were found in a Xiongnu grave in Ivolginsky District.<ref name="a">Александр Берзин, Тибетский буддизм: история и перспективы развития, M., 1992 (Alexandr Berzin, Tibetan Buddhism: History and Future Prospects, Moscow 1992; Буддизм, Л. Л. Абаева, М., Республика, 1991 (Buddhism, L.L. Abaeva, Respublika, Moscow 1991)</ref>
See also
[edit]- Ban Yong
- Ethnic groups in Chinese history
- History of the Han dynasty
- List of largest empires
- List of Xiongnu rulers (Chanyus)
- Nomadic empire
- Ordos culture
- Rulers family tree
- Zubu
Notes
[edit]References
[edit]Citations
[edit]Sources
[edit]- Primary sources
- Ban Gu et al., Book of Han, esp. vol. 94, part 1, part 2.
- Fan Ye et al., Book of the Later Han, esp. vol. 89.
- Sima Qian et al., Records of the Grand Historian, esp. vol. 110.
- Other sources consulted
- Template:Cite book
- Template:Cite book
- Template:Cite book
- Template:Cite book
- Template:Cite book
- Template:Cite book (Template:Cite web)
- Template:Cite book
- Template:Cite journal
- Template:Cite book (Proceedings of the First International Conference of Eurasian Archaeology, University of Chicago, 3–4 May 2002.)
- Template:Cite book
- Template:Cite book (original edition)
- Template:Cite book (First paperback edition)
- Template:Cite journal
- Template:Cite journal
- Template:Cite book
- Template:Cite book
- Hall, Mark & Minyaev, Sergey. Chemical Analyses of Xiong-nu Pottery: A Preliminary Study of Exchange and Trade on the Inner Asian Steppes. In: Journal of Archaeological Science (2002) 29, pp. 135–144
- Template:Cite book
- Template:Cite book
- Template:Cite journal
- Template:Cite book
- Template:Cite book
- Template:Cite book
- Template:Cite journal
- Template:Cite journal
- Template:Cite journal
- Template:Cite book
- Template:Cite book Internet Archive
- Template:Citation.
- Template:Cite journal
- Template:Cite book
- Template:Cite journal
- Template:Cite journal
- Template:Cite journal
- Template:Cite journal
- Template:Cite journal
- Template:Cite web
- Template:Cite web
- Template:Cite book Chapters:
- 〈魏晋杂胡考 一 屠各〉
- 〈魏晋杂胡考 四 乌丸〉
- 〈魏晋杂胡考 二 卢水胡〉
- Template:Cite bookTemplate:Dead link
- Template:Cite book
- Template:Cite book AuthorHouse.
Further reading
[edit]Template:Library resources box Template:Refbegin
- Davydova, Anthonina. The Ivolga archaeological complex. Part 1. The Ivolga fortress. In: Archaeological sites of the Xiongnu, vol. 1. St Petersburg, 1995.
- Davydova, Anthonina. The Ivolga archaeological complex. Part 2. The Ivolga cemetery. In: Archaeological sites of the Xiongnu, vol. 2. St Petersburg, 1996.
- Template:In lang Davydova, Anthonina & Minyaev Sergey. The complex of archaeological sites near Dureny village. In: Archaeological sites of the Xiongnu, vol. 5. St Petersburg, 2003.
- Davydova, Anthonina & Minyaev Sergey. The Xiongnu Decorative bronzes. In: Archaeological sites of the Xiongnu, vol. 6. St Petersburg, 2003.
- Template:In lang Helimski, Eugen. "A szamojéd népek vázlatos története" (Short History of the Samoyedic peoples). In: The History of the Finno-Ugric and Samoyedic Peoples. 2000, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, Hungary.
- Template:In lang Kiuner (Kjuner, Küner) [Кюнер], N.V. 1961. Китайские известия о народах Южной Сибири, Центральной Азии и Дальнего Востока (Chinese reports about peoples of Southern Siberia, Central Asia, and Far East). Moscow.
- Template:In lang Klyashtorny S.G. [Кляшторный С.Г.] 1964. Древнетюркские рунические памятники как источник по истории Средней Азии. (Ancient Türkic runiform monuments as a source for the history of Central Asia). Moscow: Nauka.
- Template:In lang Kradin , Nikolay. 2002. "Hun Empire". Acad. 2nd ed., updated and added., Moscow: Logos, Template:ISBN
- Kradin, Nikolay. 2005. Social and Economic Structure of the Xiongnu of the Trans-Baikal Region. Archaeology, Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia, No 1 (21), p. 79–86.
- Kradin, Nikolay. 2012. New Approaches and Challenges for the Xiongnu Studies. In: Xiongnu and its eastward Neighbours. Seoul, p. 35–51.
- Template:In lang Liu Mau-tsai. 1958. Die chinesischen Nachrichten zur Geschichte der Ost-Türken (T'u-küe). Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz.
- Minyaev, Sergey. On the origin of the Xiongnu // Bulletin of International association for the study of the culture of Central Asia, UNESCO. Moscow, 1985, No. 9.
- Minyaev, Sergey. News of Xiongnu Archaeology // Das Altertum, vol. 35. Berlin, 1989.
- Minyaev, Sergey. "Niche Grave Burials of the Xiong-nu Period in Central Asia", Information Bulletin, Inter-national Association for the Cultures of Central Asia 17 (1990): 91–99.
- Minyaev, Sergey. The excavation of Xiongnu Sites in the Buryatia Republic// Orientations, vol. 26, n. 10, Hong Kong, November 1995.
- Minyaev, Sergey. Les Xiongnu// Dossiers d' archaeologie, # 212. Paris 1996.
- Minyaev, Sergey. Archaeologie des Xiongnu en Russie: nouvelles decouvertes et quelques Problemes. In: Arts Asiatiques, tome 51, Paris, 1996.
- Template:In lang Minyaev, Sergey. Derestuj cemetery. In: Archaeological sites of the Xiongnu, vol. 3. St-Petersburg, 1998.
- Minyaev, Sergey. The origins of the "Geometric Style" in Hsiungnu art // BAR International series 890. London, 2000.
- Minyaev, Sergey. Art and archeology of the Xiongnu: new discoveries in Russia. In: Circle of Iner Asia Art, Newsletter, Issue 14, December 2001, pp. 3–9
- Template:In lang Minyaev, Sergey. The Xiongnu cultural complex: location and chronology. In: Ancient and Middle Age History of Eastern Asia. Vladivostok, 2001, pp. 295–305.
- Miniaev, Sergey & Elikhina, Julia. On the chronology of the Noyon Uul barrows. The Silk Road 7 (2009): 21–30.
- Minyaev, Sergey & Sakharovskaja, Lidya. Investigation of a Xiongnu Royal Tomb in the Tsaraam valley, part 1. In: Newsletters of the Silk Road Foundation, vol. 4, no.1, 2006.
- Minyaev, Sergey & Sakharovskaja, Lidya. Investigation of a Xiongnu Royal Tomb in the Tsaraam valley, part 2. In: Newsletters of the Silk Road Foundation, vol. 5, no.1, 2007.
- Minyaev, Sergey & Smolarsky Phillipe. Art of the Steppes. Brussels, Foundation Richard Liu, 2002.
- Template:In lang Obrusánszky, Borbála. August 2009. Tongwancheng, city of the southern Huns. Transoxiana, August 2009, 14. Template:ISSN.
- Template:In lang Petkovski, Elizabet. 2006. Polymorphismes ponctuels de séquence et identification génétique: étude par spectrométrie de masse MALDI-TOF. Strasbourg: Université Louis Pasteur. Dissertation
- Template:In lang Potapov, L.P. 1969. Этнический состав и происхождение алтайцев Template:Webarchive (Etnicheskii sostav i proiskhozhdenie altaitsev, Ethnic composition and origins of the Altaians). Leningrad: Nauka. Facsimile in Microsoft Word format.
- Template:In lang Potapov, L.P. [Потапов, Л.П.] 1966. Этнионим Теле и Алтайцы. Тюркологический сборник (The ethnonym "Tele" and the Altaians. Turcologica): 233–240. Moscow: Nauka.
- Template:In lang Talko-Gryntsevich, Julian. 1999. Paleo-Ethnology of Trans-Baikal area. In: Archaeological sites of the Xiongnu, vol. 4. St Petersburg.
- Taskin V.S. [Таскин В.С.]. 1984. Материалы по истории древних кочевых народов группы Дунху (Materials on the history of the ancient nomadic peoples of the Dunhu group). Moscow.
- Brosseder, Ursula, and Bryan Miller. Xiongnu Archaeology: Multidisciplinary Perspectives of the First Steppe Empire in Inner Asia. Bonn: Freiburger Graphische Betriebe- Freiburg, 2011.
- Template:Cite journal
- Hill, John E. (2009) Through the Jade Gate to Rome: A Study of the Silk Routes during the Later Han Dynasty, 1st to 2nd centuries CE. BookSurge, Charleston, South Carolina. Template:ISBN. (Especially pp. 69–74)
- Houle, J. and L.G. Broderick (2011) "Settlement Patterns and Domestic Economy of the Xiongnu in Khanui Valley, Mongolia", 137–152. In Xiongnu Archaeology: Multidisciplinary Perspectives of the First Steppe Empire in Inner Asia.
- Template:Cite journal
- Template:Cite journal
- Template:Cite web
- Template:Cite journal
- Yap, Joseph P, (2019). The Western Regions, Xiongnu and Han, from the Shiji, Hanshu and Hou Hanshu. Template:ISBN
- Template:Cite book
External links
[edit]Template:Commons category Template:Wiktionary Template:EB1911 poster
- Material Culture presented by University of Washington
- Encyclopedic Archive on Xiongnu
- The Xiongnu Empire
- The Silk Road Volume 4 Number 1
- The Silk Road Volume 9
- Gold Headdress from Aluchaideng
- Belt buckle, Xiongnu type, 3rd–2nd century B.C.
- Videodocumentation: Xiongnu – the burial site of the Hun prince (Mongolia)
- The National Museum of Mongolian History :: Xiongnu
- Xiongnu and the Central Plains: The Collision and Fusion of Civilizations, Henan Provincial Museum exhibition Template:In lang
Template:Central Asian history Template:16 Kingdoms Template:Inner Asia Template:Empires Template:Huns Template:Authority control