"What did 5th Century Huns look like?" Topic

I ask because I so often see them depicted like Mongols of the 12th Century, which I have to doubt.

I have seen one McBride plate recently that made me rethink how these guys must have looked. It was on the web, so I don't know when or where it first appeared; a noble is watching a warrior aim his bow, and he has a captive German warrior held on a rope. The warrior wears a Scythian type hat, I think the Huns were more closely related to them than the Mongols (or their forebares). It struck me that I had never seen figures that look much like these guys.

Any thoughts?

I think that a noticeable mixture of Eurasian (Scythian/Gothic) AND salvaged Late Roman armor are a must for 5th century Hunnic cavalry!

Their subject peoples (Gepids, Goths, etc.) would have more looted Late Roman armor still, as some were Romanized barbarian deserters.

CC

Pretty much like 4th century Huns, only older ; )

Like 12th century "Huns." Really. Magyars, known as the last of the nomadic Hungarians, were just another Steppes coalition with furry hats, long coats, recurved "Turkish" (composite) bows, and scads of under-sized, hardy horses. Hair styles don't even differ much; still a lot of braided and unbraided facial and head hair. Shaved heads otherwise. The only difference would be as already stated; the armor (little enough of that anyway) would be purloined late-Roman. The later "Huns" would have typical arms and armor taken from their "medieval" Germanic enemies mixed with their own (which would not differ much at all during the centuries between).

The main mass of warriors have little or no armor, ergo do not appear very changed at all for over a thousand years. It's the elites, the heavy horse of the head honcho, that display the armor styles of the specific period. So the helmet styles change, shield shapes, and so forth, according to the period. A Roman period Hunnish heavy cav unit would look Romanish. A Magyar heavy cav unit would look medieval Germanic.

If you were to believe the first descriptions they looked like orcs.

I don't think they looked much like mongols by the time they entered europe. It seems they mixed with any people or tribe the encountered and subjected, so They may have looked very diverse. After Atilla I think they would've looked like most eastern Gothic or germanic warriors with armour etc.
Still, the mongol droopy moustache is a save bet.

The binded skulls may have been a thing for nobles only or early huns.

But in the end nobody really knows.

Well thats another non-traditional interpretation in this painting; both Huns are clean shaven!
Also the noble is wearing a fur hat, with 'drooping ears', just like a Scythian cap.

I think I may have too closely associated the Huns and Scythians. Well the Romans made the same mistake.

"Scythian headgear is just a generic term to cover Eastern hats of that type – the Mongols have them. That doesn't necessarily mean that they were related to that group."

From my reading there was an Iranian strain in Mongolia – There are a number of accounts of 'Tartars' with green/grey/chestnut coloured-eyes and red hair, including the Great Khan himself.

"Pretty much like 4th century Huns, only older ; )"

Beat me to it!

:-)

Later,
Markus

Except of course that 5th century Huns would be *younger* than 4th century ones! ;-)

Scott K.

How about colors-wise?

I've got the Foundry "Huns and Frankish Allies" army in 25mm, but I'm very hesitant to paint it because I'm unsure how to proceed…

Swarthy skinned, dark haired.

Horses have black socks, manes and tails and dun through reddish brown to dark brown predominating: the occasional "grey" or black horse is okay.

Clothing would be mostly natural hues; and wool is the most common cloth, ergo, dark grey through off white, brown too; looted Roman clothing would include a few bright spots of vibrant silk (don't over do it). Linen is greyish brown through almost white (the lighter it is the more rare it is).

Leather would mostly be natural tanned with rawhide (off white) for shield/targ rims and facing (or plain wood for cheaper targs). Designs on shields would be rare and more geometric segmenting and the like, not very many stylized animals or other objects. Some leather would be dyed, with rust/red predominating; earthy greens and tertiary blues too. (don't over do it) Pillaged Roman shields, of course, would be painted to match the unit taken from.

Armor was rare; and often what there was being made of leather, wood and bone. So don't over do the metal look. Plundered Roman trooper mail of course would be blackened iron: Roman helmets either bronze or blackened iron.

Metal was mostly iron, with any of the common "pretty" metals such as bronze, brass or copper for trim on scabbards, hilts and horse tackle: gold and silver would be very rare for any common objects that large.

The fletching on arrows would be white or grey.

It is tempting to make Huns look dirty/grungy. Mostly they should just look weathered, imho. (most of the infamous grunge was the smell, I am sure, not an excess of dirt/mud)

Franks were swarthy skinned to light skinned; medium brown hair to fair haired (but not "yellow", more pale honey); some dark brown and black hair. Same colors, but shields can be more brightly painted and Romanized: stylized lightning bolts, wings, scrolls and the like. (The Romans were the "fashion" trend setters, after all. Franks/Goths and the like had been in more close contact with Rome than the Huns….)

I would expect Christian motifs to be defaced or scrubbed off or over-painted, on any non Christian "barbarian" shields.

Don't forget the Alans. They were causaians, similar to teh Scythians and were conquerored bu the Huns in the mid 4th century. I'm sure many went over to serve the Huns. They had a similar fighing style, hore archers, armored nobles so they probably dressed the same also.
Andrew

My mental picture is similar to Doug's, except in a couple of minor details-

Clothing colours- I'd imagine, by extension from various Osprey pics of nomads(dangerous!), that more coloured clothing would be available, either homedyed by the Huns or looted.

Armour- whilst chainmail is blackened, helmets can be very shiny, indeed, assuming that the Huns cleaned them.

Furs- we know that the Huns wore a lot of furs or "field mouse skins", which were probably marmot skins, and potentially rather fine.

Something I'd love to know, is whether the Hun heavy cavalry fought with spear and shield, or shieldless with a two-handed lance.

Simon

My own pet theory, based on a lot of the same stuff cited above, is that steppe nomads pretty much all looked alike. Now, I am sure each clan and sept had its own dress-code and traditions, but since we have NO IDEA what those were….I love nomad armies and have modeled them by mixing Huns with Cumans with Avars with Pechenegs with Alans with Sarmatians etc etc. I have left out Scythians and as too distinctive, but otherwise my Steppe Horse Archer Horde works for a LARGE number of armies. I get a lot of compliments. Does it look wrong? very likely it does, but not in any historically provable way.

Hi

Err… Well, a lot of this is looking back and trying to apply the notion of a "nation state" to an event where no such thing existed.

I always prefer to use "hun led" and "alan led" and "avar" led. Which allows for the young men responding to the call of the arrow who might have been from other tribes and may have looked different.

R

By the time they fought the battle of Nedao in 454, I seriously doubt any of them looked like the fella in this picture:

link

CC

Would it be wrong to mix some late Roman heavy cavalry, lightly converted with horsetail tassles on their mounts' tackle and added quivers, into Attila's HC bodyguard, for variety?

Simon

"Pretty much like 4th century Huns, only older ; )"

Took the words right out of my mouth!

:-)

Actually, I have a reliable report that Allen Curtis is a very good example of what they looked like. Of course, I haven't been able to confirm that for myself, but perhaps you could ask him for a picture?
:)