Editing Huns (section)

=== Relation to the Xiongnu and other peoples called Huns ===
[[File:Hsiung-nu-Empire.png|thumb|left|Domain and influence of [[Xiongnu]] under [[Modu Chanyu]] around 205 BC: the area hypothesised to have formed the cradle of Hun culture.]]
Since [[Joseph de Guignes]] in the {{nobr|18th century}}, modern historians have associated the Huns who appeared on the borders of Europe in the {{nobr|4th century AD}} with the [[Xiongnu]] who had invaded numerous [[Zhongyuan|Central Plain]] polities from the [[Mongolian Plateau]] between the {{nobr|3rd century BC}} and the {{nobr|2nd century AD}}.{{sfn|de la Vaissière|2015|p=175, 180}} After the [[Han–Xiongnu War|devastating defeat by the Han dynasty]], the [[Xiongnu#Northern Xiongnu|northern branch]] of the Xiongnu retreated north-westward; their descendants may have migrated through the [[Eurasian Steppe]] and consequently they may have some degree of cultural and genetic continuity with the Huns.{{sfn|Wright|2011|p=60}} Scholars also discussed the relationship between the Xiongnu, the Huns, and a number of people in central Asia who were also known as or came to be identified with the name "Hun" or "[[Iranian Huns]]". The most prominent of these were [[Chionites]], the [[Kidarites]], and the [[Hephthalites]].{{sfn|Pohl|1999|p=501}}

[[Otto J. Maenchen-Helfen]] was the first to challenge the traditional approach, based primarily on the study of written sources, and to emphasize the importance of archaeological research.{{sfn|de la Vaissière|2015|p=175}} Since Maenchen-Helfen's work, the identification of the Xiongnu as the Huns' ancestors has become controversial.{{sfnm|1a1=Wright|1y=2011|1p=60 |2a1=Thompson|2y=1996|2p=1 |3a1=Schottky|3y=2004 |4a1=Sinor|4y=1990|4p=178 |5a1=Heather|5y=2005|5pp=148–149}} Additionally, several scholars have questioned the identification of the "Iranian Huns" with the European Huns.{{sfnm|1a1=Schottky|1y=2004 |2a1=Sinor|2y=1990|2p=200}} Walter Pohl cautions that
<blockquote>none of the great confederations of steppe warriors was ethnically homogenous, and the same name was used by different groups for reasons of prestige, or by outsiders to describe their lifestyle or geographic origin. [...] It is therefore futile to speculate about identity or blood relationships between H(s)iung-nu, Hephthalites, and Attila's Huns, for instance. All we can safely say is that the name ''Huns'', in late antiquity, described prestigious ruling groups of steppe warriors.{{sfn|Pohl|1999|pp=501–502}}</blockquote>
[[File:Képes krónika - 7.oldal - A hunok bejövetele Pannóniába.jpg|thumb|Arrival of the Huns in Pannonia ([[Chronicon Pictum]], 1358)]]
Today, there is "no general consensus" and "scholarship is divided" on the issue of a Hun-Xiongnu connection.{{sfn|Ball|2021|p=174}} Recent supporters of a connection between the Huns and Xiongnu include [[Hyun Jin Kim]] and [[Etienne de la Vaissière]]. De la Vaissière argues that ancient Chinese and Indian sources used ''Xiongnu'' and ''Hun'' to translate each other,{{sfn|de la Vaissière|2015|pp=178–180}} and that the various "Iranian Huns" were similarly identified with the Xiongnu.{{sfn|de la Vaissière|2015|pp=181–183}} Kim believes that the term Hun was "not primarily an ethnic group, but a political category"{{sfn|Kim|2015|p=46}} and argues for a fundamental political and cultural continuity between the Xiongnu and the European Huns,{{sfnm|1a1=Kim|1y=2013|1p=31 |2a1=Kim|2y=2015|2pp=6–8}} as well as between the Xiongnu and the "Iranian Huns".{{sfn|Kim|2015|pp=39, 44–53}}