| |

Battle of Chalons: Attila the Hun Versus Flavius AetiusMilitary History | 5 comments | Print This Post | Email This Post
Upon their arrival in Pannonia, the Huns began to mingle with those Germans who had remained, mainly Gepids and Ostrogoths. Cities of Hunnic tents began to spring up as the steppe nomad blended into the more settled, pastoral Gothic lifestyle. The Hunnic empire swelled until it soon reached from the Rhine and Danube frontiers to the Baltic Sea in the north and the great plains of Russia in the east. Subscribe Today
Now the time had come for the showdown between the avaricious Huns and the crippled Roman Empire. In terms of available manpower, Rome’s resources far outstripped those available to the Huns. However, the Huns had the advantage of speed of maneuver and the ability to attack at any chosen spot. They also refused to accept battle other than on terms favorable to themselves. As a result, the Romans had little answer to the Hunnic incursions. From 420 a Hunnic dynasty had begun to emerge, led first by a chieftain known as Oktar, who began to weld the disparate Hunnic tribes into a cohesive whole with a common purpose. Oktar was succeeded by his brother Rua, after whose death the tribes fell under the joint rule of his two nephews, Attila and Bleda. Bleda, a simple fellow, was soon murdered by the scheming Attila, who then emerged as the unchallenged lord of the Huns. The Roman historian Renatus Profuturus Frigeridus described Attila as follows: ‘Of middle height, he was manly in appearance and well made, neither too frail nor too heavy; he was quick of wit and agile of limb, a very practiced horseman and a skilful archer, he was indefatigable with the spear. A born warrior, he was renowned for the arts of peace, without avarice and little swayed by desire, endowed with the gifts of the mind, not swerving from his purpose for any kind of evil instigation. He bore wrongs with the utmost patience and loved labor. Undaunted by danger, he was excelled by none in the endurance of hunger, thirst and vigil.’
According to contemporary historians, Attila himself was not greedy for plunder. In fact his tastes were simple. Even at the height of his power, when Roman emissaries came to him to plead for peace, he still imbibed from a simple wooden drinking bowl, as might the lowliest of his followers. His passion for power, however, required him to provide for the wants of those who would follow him. And the Hunnic warrior’s motivation was plunder. So long as Attila could supply that, he would have the loyalty of the entire Hunnic nation. With that in mind, from the moment he came to power, Attila’s energies were directed at extracting as much booty as possible from the still wealthy provinces of the Roman Empire.
The Huns’ first major raid under Attila was launched across the Danube in 440 against the Eastern Empire. Whether by coincidence or design, it coincided with the Vandals’ siege of Carthage. Roman troops that had been dispatched to forestall the Carthage threat had to be recalled by Emperor Theodosius to defend the capital. As a result, Carthage and Africa were lost. Attila’s warriors sacked Belgrade and numerous other centers–70 according to historian Edward Gibbon–defeating Roman armies three times in succession and penetrating as far as the outskirts of Constantinople itself. Thrace and Macedonia were ravaged, but in spite of an earthquake that leveled part of its mighty land walls, the Eastern capital itself was left untouched.
For now, the Huns settled for returning to the Pannonian plains with thousands of captives and wagonloads of booty. Theodosius was forced to sue for peace on unfavorable terms, but they were not all fulfilled by the Romans, giving Attila an excuse to launch a second raid in 442. Once again cities were sacked and Roman armies defeated, and again Constantinople was only saved by its impenetrable walls. The victorious Huns withdrew once more, weighed down with plunder.
In keeping with his policy of preserving his followers’ loyalty through pillage, Attila launched a third raid in 447, with the same results as the previous two. To make matters worse, the entire region was hit by a massive earthquake (a natural disaster repeated in 1999). Previously impregnable walls were leveled, and the cities they protected were sacked by Attila’s hordes. Constantinople was only saved by the efforts of every able-bodied citizen to rebuild its damaged walls. To buy time for that operation to be completed, another Roman army marched forth to face the seemingly invincible Huns along the Vid River. Although the Romans suffered another defeat, they had learned enough of Hunnic warfare by then to manage to inflict massive losses on the men from the steppes. The battle broke the back of the Hunnic effort, and after looting as far south as Greece, the invasion petered out. Pages: 1 2 3 4 5Tags: Ancient-Medieval, Historical Conflicts
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||
What is HistoryNet?The HistoryNet.com is brought to you by the Weider History Group, the world's largest publisher of history magazines. HistoryNet.com contains daily features, photo galleries and over 5,000 articles originally published in our various magazines. If you are interested in a specific history subject, try searching our archives, you are bound to find something to pique your interest. |
From Our Magazines
|
Weider History Group |
Weider History Network: HistoryNet | Armchair General | Great History | Achtung Panzer! Terms of Use | Copyright © 2009 Weider History Group. All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited. |
||
5 Comments to “Battle of Chalons: Attila the Hun Versus Flavius Aetius”
Finally a report that humanizes Attila. Thank you.
By adonasetb on Aug 16, 2008 at 8:20 pm
attila the hun was badass
By ashley on Feb 12, 2009 at 3:18 pm
that was crap u tosser
By cameron on May 28, 2009 at 8:59 pm
From reading this article I wonder how Aetius got the Visigoths the potential enemy of Rome if the Huns wouldn”t have invaded to take the brunt of the battle rather than his legionaries. This seems more of a visigoth victory than a roman.
By David French on Jul 4, 2009 at 12:12 am
If you read the original sources,.e. Getica, it sure looks like Attila won the battle and both the Visigoths and Aetius escaped from the battlefield. Based on the battle description the so called roman victory is imagined by later historians…
By Jeliko on Jul 10, 2009 at 5:12 pm