Page:Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography Volume I Part 2.djvu/357

 1098 HUNNL lation named by Amnuanus MarcelUnns CkioniiMf are Huns — name for name. Their king Grumbates, along with the king of the Cancasian Albania, was an ally of Sapor in the war against Julian (xviii. 6. § 22). Populations akin to the Huns in North- em Armenia, or along the Georgian frontier, are by no means improbable. Relatiohs op thb HuKin to thb Huk-jo OF CnnfESB HI8TOBY. — The criticiam upon the connection (real or supposed) of the Huns with a population that came in contact with the Chinese, lias been deferred until the present occasion. It oomea best after a notice of the White Huns. Gibbon*s account is that of De Guignes. Neumann has adopted, and in some degree sanctioned, the ▼iews of the French and English historians. As Neumann is well versed in Chinese literature, his opinion is important. The criticism of the present writer is based upon no pretence of anything of the sort. He only takes the evidence as he finds it. Let us see what is stated, and then compare it with what is proved. A writer (Sse-ma-tsien) whose date is fixed about b. a 100, but whose writings liave not come down to us, and who is only known from being quoted by Ma-tu-an-lin (a writer of the eighth century A. d.), is said to have stated that, between B.C. 2357 and B. c. 2205, there lived on the Upper Hoangho a tribe called by the Chinese Shan-jang (armed mountaineers). Between b.c 2205 and b. o. 1766, the name for the population of these localities is Hun-jo. That the Shan-jang are the Hun-jo under a Chinese, and the Hun-jo the Shan-jang under a native name, is stated by Neumann ; but it if on mferenqe of hie awn, un- supported (so far aa his text goes) by anything Chinese. Hence, admitting the Hun-jo to be Huns, the evidence of their being Shan-jang is in- complete. This subtracts something from their antiquity. The histery proceeds with the statement that — about b. C 300 there was a great Tanjon (sovereign) of the Hun- jo named Tedman, and that he came 1000 yean after an individual named Shtm- wei ; nothing being known for the intervaL Thb aabtracts agam from the historical antiquity of the Him-jo. About b. c. 207 Maotun conquera great part of China, and about A. D. 90 his descendants are themselves conquered and ejected. This we get from the Chinese. We also get the statement that these broken and ejected Hun-jo moved west- wards. They are now getting towards a time and place where European history takes cognisance of them. The Hun-jo are pressed by the Chinese, press upon the Alans, and come out as the Huns of the time of Valens. It may narrow the question if we criticise this last fact in the history of the Hun-jo only; leaving out the earlier ones, as being but remotely connected with that of the Huns. Can the fugitive from China, A. D. 90, be connected with the invaders of South Russia in the time of Valens ? The best attenti<Hi which the writer of this article has been able to give to the modem writers on this subject, has left him with the conviction that the connection is one of theur own making. No western writer carries the Huns east of the Volga ; no Chinese one, west of the latitude of Lake Baikal. Neumann's references lead us to believe that the Alans are mentioned by the Chinese historians. The context shows that they are not The link, tlien, is hypothetical and unsa- tisfactory. It may have stmck some that the whole 4)f the BTAKPOLI& ChuNse evidence for these euiy tiiiitt foctory, — unsatisfactory even as a geneni vi But there are suspiciious details as wdLL TcdncBy the first Tanjon of the Huns, reappeare aome cen- turies later as the first Khan ci the Toilcs. Neo- mann himself aigaes that the word Gan-taai (or Antsai) in the Chinese books means Asia, word fai word; and that it was a name taken from the western world. If this, why not more ? Why not the name Hnn-jo? The fiicts that are foond xa tke writere who have dealt with the Hnn-jo biatoiy, as taken from the Chinese, are saspidoaslj like the fwta of the Byzantine historiazM. The naoie JDi^ Of-pml is given as being a Chineee form for AMJMnm Aos, a kmg certainly oonneeted with Byxantinc^ net to certwnly with Chinese, history. It ia bj no mens certain that the whola history of the Hms-jo is older than the influence of those Syrian Chrisiisna in China and Mongolia, who gave the MwiyiBapB their alphabet, and with it (perhaps) a snfikaait inkling of the histoiy of Western Asia to be adapted to the antiquities of their own eoimtiy. But, granting this view to be nntenaXdc^ and thst the Chinese history is authentic, we innst that the Huns of Attila were one thiqg, the Huns of Turkestan another; and it may be that, if some Huns or other must be fanogfat in contact with Chma, the case is the stroogcr for those of Tnrkestan. At the present momeBt, the Turk populations of Yarkend and Kboten bebng l» what is called CAtnese TarUtnf ; whereas, between the Northern Turks (Tartaiy) and China, the vvt tract of Mongolia mtervenes. Such is a sketch of the reasona for discooncctiBg the Huns of Attik and the Hun- jo ef CbinEse authors. (Gibbon, Dedme and FaU^ ^e. ; Creasv, DecieiwBaUke of the frorU(Chalons); De GaigBn, HUtoire dee Hvne; Neumann, Die VoiiBer dee Sid- iehtn Rutelande.) [R. 6. L.] HUNNUM, m Britain, the fifth station along the line of the Vallum, beginning at Segednn»a (^WaUeend), where the Notitia places the Ala Sale- niana — a body of troops probaUy named after Hadrian's empress, Salnna. It coincides with the present locality of JTia/ton, where Roman remains are abundant, and where, in a-d. 1600, Camden fonnd a monumental slab erected to the memoiy of a soldier of the Ala Salnniana. For a notice of the excaTstiaB made at Hunnum and its results, as well as for that of Roman road, and a bridge made out an ohler Roman one, see Brace's IZmum Wall, pp. 126-^ 141. [R. G, L.] HYAEA. [Htlb, Na 2.] HYAMPEIA. [Dblphi, p. 764, a.] HYA'MPOLIS {Tdfjorohis: Etk ^ofanKtrv), an ancisnt town of Phocis, mentioned by Homer (IL iL 521), and said to have been founded by the Hyantes after they had been expelled from BoeoUa by the Cadminans. (Pans. ix. 35. § 5; StnsK ix. p. 424.) It was situated on the rosd leading from Orchomenus to Opus (Pans. I c), and, as it stood at the entrance of a valley which fanned a ooo- venient passage from Lociis into Phocis and Boeotia, its name frequently occurs in history. It was at the entrance of this pass that the Phocians gained a victory over the Thessalians. (Herod. viiL S&) Hyampolis was afterwards destroyed, along with the other Phocian towns, by the army of Xerxes. (Hend. viii. 33.) In B. c. 37 1 Ja.-on, in his march throngh Phocis, when he was returning fttwn Boeotia after the battle of Leoctn, is said to have taken *Tflvi»»-