XIONGNU
Before
Han–Xiongnu War: Territory of the Xiongnu which includes Mongolia,
East Kazakhstan, East Kyrgyzstan, and parts of northern China including
Western Manchuria, Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia, Gansu.
The
Xiongnu (Chinese: Wade–Giles: Hsiung-nu) were a tribal confederation
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. Chinese sources report that Modu Chanyu, the supreme
leader after 209 BC, founded the Xiongnu Empire.
After
their previous rivals, the Yuezhi, migrated into Central Asia during
the 2nd century BC, the Xiongnu became a dominant power on the steppes
of north-east Central Asia, centered on an area known later as Mongolia.
The Xiongnu were also active in areas now part of Siberia, Inner
Mongolia, Gansu and Xinjiang. Their relations with adjacent Chinese
dynasties to the south-east were complex, with repeated periods
of conflict and intrigue, alternating with exchanges of tribute,
trade, and marriage treaties (heqin). During the Sixteen Kingdoms
era, as one of the Five Barbarians, they founded several dynastic
states in northern China, such as Former Zhao, Northern Liang and
Xia.
Attempts
to identify the Xiongnu with later groups of the western Eurasian
Steppe remain controversial. Scythians and Sarmatians were concurrently
to the west. 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,
although this is disputed. Other linguistic links – all of
them also controversial – proposed by scholars include Iranian,
Mongolic, Turkic, Uralic, Yeniseian, Tibeto-Burman or multi-ethnic.
History
:
Early history :
An early reference to the Xiongnu was by the Han dynasty historian
Sima Qian who wrote about the Xiongnu in the Records of the Grand
Historian (c. 100 BC). The ancestor of Xiongnu was a descendent
of the rulers of Xia dynasty by the name of Chunwei. It also draws
a distinct line between the settled Huaxia people (Chinese) to the
pastoral nomads (Xiongnu), characterizing it as two polar groups
in the sense of a civilization versus an uncivilized society: the
Hua–Yi distinction. Pre-Han sources often classify the Xiongnu
as a Hu people, which was a blanket term for nomadic people; it
only became an ethnonym for the Xiongnu during the Han.
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.
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. 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.
Sinologist
Edwin 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.
Qin's campaign against the Xiongnu expanded Qin's territory at the
expense of the Xiongnu. after the unification of Qin dynasty, Xiongnu
was a threat to the northern board of Qin. They were like to attack
Qin dynasty when they suffered natural disasters. In 215 BC, Qin
Shi Huang sent General Meng Tian to conquer the Xiongnu and drive
them from the Ordos Loop, which he did later that year. After the
catastrophic defeat at the hands of Meng Tian, the Xiongnu leader
Touman was forced to flee far into the Mongolian Plateau. The Qin
empire became a threat to the Xiongnu, which ultimately led to the
reorganization of the many tribes into a confederacy.
State
formation :
Domain
and influence of Xiongnu under Modu Chanyu around 205 BC
Asia
in 200 BC, showing the early Xiongnu state and its neighbors
In 209 BC, three years before the founding of Han China, the Xiongnu
were brought together in a powerful confederation under a new chanyu,
Modu Chanyu. This new political unity transformed them into a more
formidable state by enabling the formation of larger armies and
the ability to exercise better strategic coordination. The Xiongnu
adopted many of the Chinese agriculture techniques such as slaves
for heavy labor, wore silk like the Chinese, and lived in Chinese-style
homes. The reason for creating the confederation remains unclear.
Suggestions include the need for a stronger state to deal with the
Qin unification of China that resulted in a loss of the Ordos region
at the hands of Meng Tian or the political crisis that overtook
the Xiongnu in 215 BC when Qin armies evicted them from their pastures
on the Yellow River.
After
forging internal unity, Modu Chanyu expanded the empire on all sides.
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 reoccupied all the lands previously
taken by the Qin general Meng Tian.
Under
Modu's leadership, the Xiongnu threatened the Han dynasty, almost
causing Emperor Gaozu, the first Han emperor, to lose his throne
in 200 BC. By the time of Modu's death in 174 BC, the Xiongnu had
driven the Yuezhi from the Hexi Corridor, killing the Yuezhi king
in the process and asserting their presence in the Western Regions.
The
Xiongnu were recognized as the most prominent of the nomads bordering
the Chinese Han empire and during early relations between the Xiongnu
and the Han, the former held the balance of power. According to
the Book of Han, later quoted in Duan Chengshi's ninth century Miscellaneous
Morsels from Youyang :
Also,
according to the Han shu, Wang Wu and others were sent as envoys
to pay a visit to the Xiongnu. According to the customs of the Xiongnu,
if the Han envoys did not remove their tallies of authority, and
if they did not allow their faces to be tattooed, they could not
gain entrance into the yurts. Wang Wu and his company removed their
tallies, submitted to tattoo, and thus gained entry. The Shanyu
looked upon them very highly.
Xiongnu
hierarchy :
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 became the annual meeting place and served
as the Xiongnu capital. The ruins of Longcheng have been found south
of Ulziit District, Arkhangai Province in 2017.
The
ruler of the Xiongnu was called the Chanyu. Under him were the Tuqi
Kings. The Tuqi King of the Left was normally the heir presumptive.
Next lower in the hierarchy came more officials in pairs of left
and right: the guli, the army commanders, the great governors, the
danghu and the gudu. Beneath them came the commanders of detachments
of one thousand, of one hundred, and of ten men. This nation of
nomads, a people on the march, was organized like an army.
Yap,
apparently describing the early period, places the Chanyu's main
camp north of Shanxi with the Tuqi King of the Left holding the
area north of Beijing and the Tuqi King of the Right holding the
Ordos Loop area as far as Gansu. Grousset, probably describing the
situation after the Xiongnu had been driven north, places the Chanyu
on the upper Orkhon River near where Genghis Khan would later establish
his capital of Karakorum. The Tuqi King of the Left lived in the
east, probably on the high Kherlen River. The Tuqi King of the Right
lived in the west, perhaps near present-day Uliastai in the Khangai
Mountains.
Marriage
diplomacy with Han China :
A
Han Chinese glazed ceramic figurine of a mounted horse archer, 50
BC to 50 AD, late Western or early Eastern Han Dynasty
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 sent 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. 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 Liu Jing
[zh] was dispatched for negotiations. The peace settlement eventually
reached between the parties included a Han princess given in marriage
to the chanyu (called heqin) (Chinese: lit.: 'harmonious kinship');
periodic gifts to the Xiongnu of silk, distilled beverages and rice;
equal status between the states; and the Great Wall as mutual border.
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 the Laoshang Chanyu, continued his father's
expansionist policies. Laoshang succeeded in negotiating with Emperor
Wen terms 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.[citation
needed]
The
Xiongnu also practiced marriage alliances with Han dynasty officers
and officials who defected to their side. The older sister of the
Chanyu (the Xiongnu ruler) was married to the Xiongnu General Zhao
Xin, the Marquis of Xi who was serving the Han dynasty. The daughter
of the Chanyu was married to the Han Chinese General Li Ling after
he surrendered and defected. Another Han Chinese General who defected
to the Xiongnu was Li Guangli, general in the War of the Heavenly
Horses, who also married a daughter of the Chanyu.
When
the Eastern Jin dynasty ended the Xianbei Northern Wei received
the Han Chinese Jin prince Sima Chuzhi as a refugee. A Northern
Wei Xianbei Princess married Sima Chuzhi, giving birth to Sima Jinlong.
Northern Liang Xiongnu King Juqu Mujian's daughter married Sima
Jinlong.
Han-Xiongnu
war :
The Han dynasty world order in AD 2
The Han dynasty made preparations for war when the Han Emperor Wu
dispatched the 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.
While Zhang Qian did not succeed in this mission, his reports of
the west provided even greater incentive to counter the Xiongnu
hold on westward routes out of China, and the Chinese prepared to
mount a large scale attack using the Northern Silk Road to move
men and material.
While
Han China was 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 autumn 129 BC, when 40,000 Chinese 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. [page needed] Major
logistical difficulties limited the duration and long-term continuation
of these campaigns. According to the analysis of Yan You, 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.
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 China.
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 Chinese 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 Chinese control over the Xiongnu, the Xiongnu
became unstable and were no longer a threat to the Han Chinese.
Xiongnu among other people in Asia around 1 AD
Ban Chao, Protector General (Duhu) of the Han dynasty, embarked
with an army of 70,000 soldiers in a campaign against the Xiongnu
remnants who were harassing the trade route now known as the Silk
Road. His successful military campaign saw the subjugation of one
Xiongnu tribe after another. Ban Chao also sent an envoy named Gan
Ying to Daqin (Rome). Ban Chao was created the Marquess of Dingyuan
(i.e., "the Marquess who stabilized faraway places") for
his services to the Han Empire and returned to the capital Luoyang
at the age of 70 years and died there in the year 102. Following
his death, the power of the Xiongnu in the Western Regions increased
again, and the emperors of subsequent dynasties did not reach as
far west until the Tang dynasty.
Xiongnu
Civil War (60–53 BC) :
When a Chanyu died, power could pass to his younger brother if his
son was not of age. This system, which can be compared to Gaelic
tanistry, 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 the 12th Chanyu died in 60 BC, power
was taken by Woyanqudi, a grandson of the 12th Chanyu's cousin.
Being something of a usurper, he tried to put his own men in power,
which only increased the number of his enemies. The 12th Chanyu'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 14th Chanyu. The Woyanqudi faction then set up his brother,
Tuqi, as Chanyu (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 :
Bronze
seal says "To Han obedient, friendly and loyal chief of Xiongnu
of Han".Bronze seal conferred by the Eastern Han government
on a Xiongnu chief
In 53 BC Huhanye decided to enter into tributary relations with
Han China. 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". During this period, however,
the Xiongnu maintained political sovereignty and full territorial
integrity. The Great Wall of China continued to serve as the line
of demarcation between Han and Xiongnu.[citation needed]
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. 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 AD–48),
corresponding to the political upheavals of the Xin Dynasty in China.
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 :
An Eastern Han Chinese glazed ceramic statue of a horse
with bridle and halter headgear, from Sichuan, late 2nd century
to early 3rd century AD
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 chanyu'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.
The
Northern Xiongnu :
The rump kingdom under Punu, around the Orkhon (modern north central
Mongolia) became known as the Northern Xiongnu. Punu, who became
known as the Northern Chanyu, began to put military pressure on
the Southern Xiongnu.
In
49 AD, Tsi Yung, a Han governor of Liaodong, allied with the Wuhuan
and Xianbei, attacked the Northern Xiongnu. The Northern Xiongnu
suffered two major defeats: one at the hands of the Xianbei in 85
AD, and by the Han during the Battle of Ikh Bayan, in 89 AD. The
northern chanyu fled to the north-west with his subjects.
In
about 155 AD, the Northern Xiongnu were decisively "crushed
and subjugated" by the Xianbei.
According
to the 5th 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.
Southern and Northern Xiongnu in 200 AD, before the collapse of
the Han Dynasty
The Southern Xiongnu :
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.
Tensions
were evident between Han settlers and practitioners of the nomadic
way of life. Thus, in 94, Anguo Chanyu joined forces with newly
subjugated Xiongnu from the north and started a large scale rebellion
against the Han.
During
the late 2nd century AD, the southern Xiongnu were drawn into the
rebellions then plaguing the Han court. In 188, the chanyu was murdered
by some of his own subjects for agreeing to send troops to help
the Han suppress a rebellion in Hebei – many of the Xiongnu
feared that it would set a precedent for unending military service
to the Han court. The murdered chanyu's son Yufuluo, entitled Chizhisizhu,
succeeded him, but was then overthrown by the same rebellious faction
in 189. He travelled to Luoyang (the Han capital) to seek aid from
the Han court, but at this time the Han 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 had no choice
but to settle down with his followers in Pingyang, a city in Shanxi.
In 195, he died and was succeeded as chanyu by his brother Huchuquan
Chanyu.
In
215–216 AD, the warlord-statesman Cao Cao detained Huchuquan
Chanyu in the city of Ye, and divided his followers in Shanxi into
five divisions: left, right, south, north, and centre. This was
aimed at preventing the exiled Xiongnu in Shanxi from engaging in
rebellion, and also allowed Cao Cao to use the Xiongnu as auxiliaries
in his cavalry.
Later
the Xiongnu aristocracy in Shanxi changed their surname from Luanti
to Liu for prestige reasons, claiming that they were related to
the Han imperial clan through the old intermarriage policy. After
Huchuquan, the Southern Xiongnu were partitioned into five local
tribes. Each local chief was under the "surveillance of a chinese
resident", while the shanyu was in "semicaptivity at the
imperial court."
Later
Xiongnu states in northern China :
The Southern Xiongnu that settled in northern China during the Eastern
Han dynasty retained their tribal affiliation and political organization
and played an active role in Chinese politics. During the Sixteen
Kingdoms (304–439 CE), Southern Xiongnu leaders founded or
ruled several kingdoms, including Liu Yuan's Han Zhao Kingdom (also
known as Former Zhao), Helian Bobo's Xia and Juqu Mengxun's Northern
Liang.
Fang
Xuanling's Book of Jin lists nineteen Xiongnu tribes: Tuge, Xianzhi,
Koutou, Wutan, Chile, Hanzhi, Heilang, Chisha, Yugang, Weisuo, Tutong,
BOmie, Qiangqu, Helai, Zhongqin, Dalou, Yongqu, Zhenshu, and Lijie.
Former
Zhao state (304 – 329) :
Han Zhao dynasty (304 – 318) :
In 304, Liu Yuan became Chanyu of the Five Hordes. In 308, declared
himself emperor and founded the Han Zhao Dynasty. In 311, his son
and successor Liu Cong captured Luoyang, and with it the Emperor
Huai of Jin China.
In
316, the Emperor Min of Jin China was captured in Chang'an. Both
emperors were humiliated as cupbearers in Linfen before being executed
in 313 and 318
North
China came under Xiongnu rule while the remnants of the Jin dynasty
survived in the south at Jiankang.
The
reign of Liu Yao (318 – 329) :
In 318, after suppressing a coup by a powerful minister in the Xiongnu-Han
court, in which the emperor and a large proportion of the aristocracy
were massacred), the Xiongnu prince Liu Yao moved the Xiongnu-Han
capital from Pingyang to Chang'an and renamed the dynasty as Zhao
(Liu Yuan had declared the empire's name Han to create a linkage
with Han Dynasty—to which he claimed he was a descendant,
through a princess, but Liu Yao felt that it was time to end the
linkage with Han and explicitly restore the linkage to the great
Xiongnu chanyu Maodun, and therefore decided to change the name
of the state. (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).
However,
the eastern part of north China came under the control of a rebel
Xiongnu-Han general of Jie ancestry named Shi Le. Liu Yao and Shi
Le fought a long war until 329, when Liu Yao was captured in battle
and executed. Chang'an fell to Shi Le soon after, and the Xiongnu
dynasty was wiped out. North China was ruled by Shi Le's Later Zhao
dynasty for the next 20 years.
However,
the "Liu" Xiongnu remained active in the north for at
least another century.
Tiefu
and Xia (260 – 431) :
The northern Tiefu branch of the Xiongnu gained control of the Inner
Mongolian region in the 10 years between the conquest of the Tuoba
Xianbei state of Dai by the Former Qin empire in 376, and its restoration
in 386 as the Northern Wei. After 386, the Tiefu were gradually
destroyed by or surrendered to the Tuoba, with the submitting Tiefu
becoming known as the Dugu. Liu Bobo, a surviving prince of the
Tiefu fled to the Ordos Loop, where he founded a state called the
Xia (thus named because of the Xiongnu's supposed ancestry from
the Xia dynasty) and changed his surname to Helian. The Helian-Xia
state was conquered by the Northern Wei in 428–31, and the
Xiongnu thenceforth effectively ceased to play a major role in Chinese
history, assimilating into the Xianbei and Han ethnicities.
Tongwancheng
(meaning "Unite All Nations") was the capital of the Xia
(Sixteen Kingdoms), whose rulers claimed descent from Modu Chanyu.
The
ruined city was discovered in 1996 and the State Council designated
it as a cultural relic under top state protection. The repair of
the Yong'an Platform, where Helian Bobo, emperor of the Da Xia regime,
reviewed parading troops, has been finished and restoration on the
31-meter-tall turret follows.[page needed]
Juqu
and Northern Liang (401 – 460) :
The Juqu were a branch of the Xiongnu. Their leader Juqu Mengxun
took over the Northern Liang by overthrowing the former puppet ruler
Duan Ye. By 439, the Juqu power was destroyed by the Northern Wei.
Their remnants were then settled in the city of Gaochang before
being destroyed by the Rouran.
Significance
:
The Xiongnu confederation was unusually long-lived for a steppe
empire. The purpose of raiding China was not simply for goods, but
to force the Chinese to pay regular tribute. The power of the Xiongnu
ruler was based on his control of Chinese tribute which he used
to reward his supporters. The Han and Xiongnu empires rose at the
same time because the Xiongnu state depended on Chinese 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 China and then used Chinese resources to defeat the Northern
Xiongnu and re-establish the empire. The second time this happened,
about 47 AD, the strategy failed. The southern ruler was unable
to defeat the northern ruler and the Xiongnu remained divided.
Ethnolinguistic
origins :
Location
of Xiongnu and other steppe nations in 300 AD
The Chinese name for the Xiongnu was a pejorative term in itself,
as the characters have the meaning of "fierce slave".
(The Chinese characters are pronounced as Xiongnú in modern
Mandarin Chinese.)
There
are several theories on the ethnolinguistic identity of the Xiongnu.
Huns
:
The sound of the first Chinese character in the name has been reconstructed
as /qhon/ in Old Chinese. This sound has a possible similarity with
the name "Hun" in European languages. The second character
means slave and appears to have no parallel in Western terminology.
Whether the similarity is evidence of kinship or mere coincidence
is hard to tell. It could lend credence to the theory that the Huns
were in fact descendants of the Northern Xiongnu who migrated westward,
or that the Huns were using a name borrowed from the Northern Xiongnu,
or that these Xiongnu made up part of the Hun confederation.
The
Xiongnu-Hun hypothesis originated with the 18th-century French historian
Joseph de Guignes, who noticed that ancient Chinese scholars had
referred to members of tribes associated with the Xiongnu by names
similar to "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 Huns were referred to as ywn (xwn), indicating
that the two were synonymous. Although the theory that the Xiongnu
were precursors of the Huns known later in Europe is now accepted
by many scholars, it has yet to become a consensus view. The identification
with the Huns may be either incorrect or 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 :
Men in Iranian dress on embroidered carpets from the Xiongnu
Noin-Ula burial site. They have also been proposed to be Yuezhi.
1st century BC - 1st century AD
Harold Walter Bailey proposed an Iranian origin of the Xiongnu,
recognizing all the earliest Xiongnu names of the 2nd century BC
as being of the Iranian type. This theory is supported by turkologist
Henryk Jankowski. 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 Northern Iranians. 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 from them the Iranian nomadic model.
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.
Mongolic
theories :
Mongolian and other scholars have suggested that the Xiongnu spoke
a language related to the Mongolic languages. 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. According to the "Book
of Song", the Rourans, whom Book of Wei identified as offspring
of Proto-Mongolic Donghu people, possessed the alternative name(s)
Dàtán "Tatar" and/or Tántán
"Tartar" and they were a Xiongnu tribe; Nikita Bichurin
considered Xiongnu and Xianbei to be two subgroups (or dynasties)
of but one same ethnicity.
Genghis
Khan refers to the time of Modu Chanyu as "the remote times
of our Chanyu" in his letter to Daoist Qiu Chuji. Sun and moon
symbol of Xiongnu that discovered by archaeologists is similar to
Mongolian Soyombo symbol.
Turkic
theories :
Proponents of a Turkic language theory include E.H. Parker, Jean-Pierre
Abel-Rémusat, Julius Klaproth, Kurakichi Shiratori, Gustaf
John Ramstedt, Annemarie von Gabain, and Omeljan Pritsak. Some sources
say the ruling class was proto-Turkic. Craig Benjamin sees the Xiongnu
as either proto-Turks or proto-Mongols who possibly spoke a language
related to the Dingling.
Chinese
sources link the Tiele people and Ashina to the Xiongnu, According
to the Book of Zhou and the History of the Northern Dynasties, the
Ashina clan was a component of the Xiongnu confederation.
Uyghur
Khagans claimed descent from the Xiongnu (according to Chinese history
Weishu, the founder of the Uyghur Khaganate was descended from a
Xiongnu ruler).
Both
the 7th-century Chinese History of the Northern Dynasties and the
Book of Zhou, an inscription in the Sogdian language, report the
Göktürks to be a subgroup of the Xiongnu.
Yeniseian
theories :
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. In 2000, Alexander
Vovin reanalyzed Pulleyblank's argument and found further support
for it by utilizing the most recent reconstruction of Old Chinese
phonology by Starostin and Baxter and a single Chinese transcription
of a sentence in the language of the Jie people, a member tribe
of the Xiongnu Confederacy. Previous Turkic interpretations of the
aforementioned sentence do not match the Chinese translation as
precisely as using Yeniseian grammar. Pulleybank and D. N. Keightley
asserted that the Xiongnu titles "were originally Siberian
words but were later borrowed by the Turkic and Mongolic peoples".
The Xiongnu language gave to the later Turkic and Mongolian empires
a number of important culture words including Turkish tängri,
Mongolian tenggeri, was originally the Xiongnu word for "heaven",
chengli. Titles such as tarqan, tegin and kaghan were also inherited
from the Xiongnu language and probably of Yeniseian origin.
According
to Vovin (2007) the Xiongnu likely spoke a Yeniseian language. They
were possibly a southern Yeniseian branch.
Multiple
ethnicities :
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. 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. Kim rejects "old racial theories or even ethnic
affiliations" in favour of the "historical reality of
these extensive, multiethnic, polyglot steppe empires".
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, but this connection is disputed, and according to
the Book of Sui and the Tongdian, they were "mixed nomads"
(simplified Chinese: pinyin: zá hú) from Pingliang.
The Ashina and Tiele may have been separate ethnic groups who mixed
with the Xiongnu. 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 was used by the Byzantine emperor and
scholar Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus in his book De Administrando
Imperio, though in his use, "Turks" always referred to
Magyars. Such archaizing was a common literary topos, and implied
similar geographic origins and nomadic lifestyle but not direct
filiation.
Some
Uyghurs claimed descent from the Xiongnu (according to Chinese history
Weishu, the founder of the Uyghur Khaganate was descended from a
Xiongnu ruler), 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. Rather, they consider them to be descendants of a
number of people, one of them the ancient Uyghurs.
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.
Language
isolate theories :
The Turkologist Gerhard Doerfer has denied any possibility of a
relationship between the Xiongnu language and any other known language.
He also strongly rejected any connection with Turkic or Mongolian.
Geographic
origins :
Bronze
plaque of a man of the Ordos Plateau, long held by the Xiongnu.
British Museum. Otto Maenchen-Helfen notes that the statuette displays
Caucasoid features
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.
Archaeology
:
In the 1920s, Pyotr Kozlov's excavations of the royal tombs at the
Noin-Ula burial site in northern Mongolia that date to around the
first century CE provided a glimpse into the lost world of the Xiongnu.
Other archaeological sites have been unearthed in Inner Mongolia.
Those include the Ordos culture of Inner Mongolia, which has been
identified as a Xiongnu culture. Sinologist Otto Maenchen-Helfen
has said that depictions of the Xiongnu of Transbaikalia and the
Ordos show individuals with "Europoid" features. Iaroslav
Lebedynsky said that Europoid depictions in the Ordos region should
be attributed to a "Scythian affinity".
Portraits
found in the Noin-Ula excavations demonstrate other cultural evidences
and influences, showing that Chinese and Xiongnu art have 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. Well-preserved bodies in Xiongnu and pre-Xiongnu
tombs in the Mongolian Republic and southern Siberia show both Mongoloid
and Caucasian features.
Analysis
of skeletal remains from some sites attributed to the Xiongnu provides
an identification of dolichocephalic Mongoloid, ethnically distinct
from neighboring populations in present-day Mongolia. Russian and
Chinese anthropological and craniofacial studies show that the Xiongnu
were physically very heterogenous, with six different population
clusters showing different degrees of Mongoloid and Caucasoid physical
traits.
Xiongnu bow
Presently, there exist four fully excavated and well documented
cemeteries: Ivolga, Dyrestui, Burkhan Tolgoi, and Daodunzi. Additionally
thousands of tombs have been recorded in Transbaikalia and Mongolia.
The Tamir 1 excavation site from a 2005 Silkroad Arkanghai Excavation
Project is the only Xiongnu cemetery in Mongolia to be fully mapped
in scale. Tamir 1 was located on Tamiryn Ulaan Khoshuu, a prominent
granitic outcrop near other cemeteries of the Neolithic, Bronze
Age, and Mongol periods. Important finds at the site included a
lacquer bowl, glass beads, and three TLV mirrors. Archaeologists
from this project believe that these artifacts paired with the general
richness and size of the graves suggests that this cemetery was
for more important or wealthy Xiongnu individuals.
The
TLV mirrors are of particular interest. Three mirrors were acquired
from three different graves at the site. The mirror found at feature
160 is believed to be a low-quality, local imitation of a Han mirror,
while the whole mirror found at feature 100 and fragments of a mirror
found at feature 109 are believed to belong to the classical TLV
mirrors and date back to the Xin Dynasty or the early to middle
Eastern Han period. The archaeologists have chosen to, for the most
part, refrain from positing anything about Han-Xiongnu relations
based on these particular mirrors. However, they were willing to
mention 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)."
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."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."
Genetics
:
A genetic study published in the American Journal of Human Genetics
in July 2003 examined the remains of 62 individuals buried between
the 3rd century BC and the 2nd century AD at the Xiongnu necropolis
at Egyin Gol in northern Mongolia. The examined individuals were
found to be primarily of Asian ancestry. A genetic 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 Mongols.
A
genetic study published in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology
in July 2010 analyzed three individuals buried at an elite Xiongnu
cemetery in Duurlig Nars of Northeast Mongolia around 0 AD. One
male carried the paternal haplogroup C3 and the maternal haplogroup
D4. The female also carried the maternal haplogroup D4. The third
individual, a male, carried the paternal haplogroup R1a1 and the
maternal haplogroup U2e1. C3 and D4 are both common in Northeast
Asia, while R1a1 and U2e1 are both West Eurasian lineages, with
R1a1 being particularly associated with eastward migrations of Indo-European
peoples.
A
genetic study published in Nature in May 2018 examined the remains
of five Xiongnu. The four samples of Y-DNA extracted belonged to
haplogroups R1, R1b, O3a and O3a3b2, while the five samples of mtDNA
extracted belonged to haplogroups D4b2b4, N9a2a, G3a3, D4a6 and
D4b2b2b. The examined Xiongnu were found to be of mixed East Asian
and West Eurasian origin, and to have had a larger amount of East
Asian ancestry than neighboring Sakas, Wusun and Kangju. The evidence
suggested that the Huns emerged through westward migrations of Xiongnu
and subsequent admixture between them and Sakas.
A
genetic study published in Scientific Reports in November 2019 examined
the remains of three individuals buried at Hunnic cemeteries in
the Carpathian Basin in the 5th century AD. The results from the
study supported the theory that the Huns were descended from the
Xiongnu.
A
genetic study published in Human Genetics in July 2020 which examined
the remains of 52 individuals excavated from the Tamir Ulaan Khoshuu
cemetery in Mongolia propose the ancestors of the Xiongnu as an
admixture between Scythians and Siberians and support the idea that
the Huns are their descendants.
Culture
:
Artistic distinctions :
This section relies largely or entirely on a single source.
Gold stag with eagle's head, and ten further heads in the antlers.
An object inspired by the art of the Siberian Altai mountain, possibly
Pazyryk, unearthed at the site of Nalinggaotu, Shenmu County, near
Xi'an, China.Possibly from the "Hun people who lived in the
prairie in Northern China". Dated to the 4th-3rd century BC,
or Han Dynasty period. Shaanxi History Museum.
Within the Xiongnu culture more variety is visible from site to
site than from "era" to "era," in terms of the
Chinese chronology, yet all form a whole that is distinct from that
of the Han and other peoples of the non-Chinese north. In some instances
iconography can not 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
a tiger carrying dead prey. We see a similar image in work from
Maoqinggou, a site which is presumed to have been under Xiongnu
political control but is still clearly non-Xiongnu. From Maoqinggou,
we see the prey replaced by an extension of the tiger's foot. The
work also depicts a lower level of execution; Maoqinggou work was
executed in a rounder, less detailed style. In its broadest sense,
Xiongnu iconography of animal predation include examples such as
the gold headdress from Aluchaideng and gold earrings with a turquoise
and jade inlay discovered in Xigouban, Inner Mongolia. The gold
headdress can be viewed, along with some other examples of Xiongnu
art, from the external links at the bottom of this article.
Xiongnu
art is harder to distinguish from Saka or Scythian art. There was
a similarity present in stylistic execution, but Xiongnu art and
Saka art did 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 a winged, horned horse.
The two cultures also used two different bird heads. Xiongnu depictions
of birds have a tendency to have a moderate eye and beak and have
ears, while Saka birds have a pronounced eye and beak and no ears.
Some scholars [who?] claim these differences are indicative of cultural
differences. Scholar Sophia-Karin Psarras claims that Xiongnu images
of animal predation, specifically tiger plus prey, is spiritual,
representative of death and rebirth, and same-animal combat is representative
of the acquisition of or maintenance of power.
Rock
art and writing :
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.
Excavations
conducted between 1924 and 1925 in the Noin-Ula kurgans produced
objects with over twenty carved characters, which were either identical
or very similar to that of to the runic letters of the Old Turkic
alphabet discovered in the Orkhon Valley. From this a some scholars
hold that the Xiongnu had a script similar to Eurasian runiform
and this alphabet itself served as the basis for the ancient Turkic
writing.
The
Records of the Grand Historian (vol. 110) state that when the Xiongnu
noted down something or transmitted a message, they made cuts on
a piece of wood; they also mention a "Hu script".
2nd century BCE – 2nd century CE characters of Hun-Xianbei
script (Mongolia and Inner Mongolia), N. Ishjamts, "Nomads
In Eastern Central Asia", in the History of civilizations of
Central Asia, Volume 2, Fig 5, p. 166, UNESCO Publishing, 1996,
ISBN 92-3-102846-4.
2nd
century BCE – 2nd century CE, characters of Hun-Xianbei script
(Mongolia and Inner Mongolia), N. Ishjamts, "Nomads In Eastern
Central Asia", in the History of civilizations of Central Asia,
Volume 2, Fig 5, p. 166, UNESCO Publishing, 1996, ISBN 92-3-102846-4.
Diet
:
Xiongnu were a nomadic people. From their lifestyle of herding flocks
and their horse-trade with China, it can be concluded that their
diet consist mainly of mutton, horse meat and wild geese that were
shot down.
Source
:
https://en.wikipedia.org/
wiki/Xiongnu