The End of Empire: Attila the Hun and the Fall of Rome [Anglais] [Broché]

Although I ordered this book with misgivings about someone building a portrait of Attila from the two dozen or so ancient sources even mentioning Attila, I was enormously pleased with the author's scholarship. The reader must remember that the Huns left no written accounts of their own, essentially no archaeological evidence, and everything written about them came strictly from their enemies. So accounts like Ammianus Marcellinus' (who never saw a Hun) describing them with flattened skulls, misshapen bodies, evil appearances, etc., etc., must be taken with very large grains of salt. Even their horses were supposedly ugly. The author strives mightly to present the probable truth, and is probably as successful as a researcher at this distance can be.

The litmus test for me came early with the author's treatment of cranial deformations to identify the Huns. Although this was a practice of certain steppe dwellers and has been associated with the Alans, whether of not the Huns practiced this is questionable. Amazingly (to me), the author addresses this issue, and in his end notes actually points out that if the process was to beautify, then high ranking Huns like Attila and his wives would have undergone this practice. But no eyewitness description of Attila mentions such a deformation! The author therefore mentions this practice as occurring among the Huns, but carefully retreats from using it as a means of identifying them. Frankly, this is scholarship at its best, and not just because the author agrees with me.

Although the author's careful use and non-use of certain sources might put off some readers, this work is probably as accurate as possible for a modern researcher. Only a couple of other writers have performed anywhere nearly as well, most notable Otto Maenchen-Helfen. The end notes must be read along with the text, and my only criticism of this work is that they should have been placed at the end of each chapter for the reader's convenience. In some places the author was forced to explain why he didn't use certain information a given ancient source, or how he came to certain conclusions based of several contradictory sources and convient end notes would have been helpful. The author is a modern-day detective analyzing the evidence, carefully qualifying his conclusions, and then writing a narrative that is understandable by all. For this he is to be greatly commended.

As an example of the author's analysis, please note that he finds that the Huns fared rather poorly in battle with the main Roman armies although they could and did destroy cities protected by static garrisons while the tactical Roman armies were otherwise occupied. The Goths did better, as at Adrianopole. This is certainly not what is ususally conveyed or understood by conventional wisdom, but is true nevertheless. As a result, it is hardly the case that Attila brought an end to the Western Roman Empire, but he did give it a shove toward its ultimate demise.

At the end of the book the author lists twenty-two ancient sources and their modern editions and translations. The reader is invited to check these sources as I did in several instances to test the author's thoroughness and accuracy. This work passed all tests for accuracy and analysis with flying colors, something almost incredible for a modern book.

I don't mean to gush over this book like a schoolgirl reading her first Gothic romance, but I can't praise this work too highly. I recommend it to all readers interested in the late Roman Empire, the rise of the Byzantine Empire, and the invasions of the Barbarians into Western Europe. It is wonderfully written, clear, and conveys a portrait of the times that is easily understandable.

It also should give American readers pause in considering a political option like buying off threatening powers (such as North Korea.) It didn't work with the Huns, and frankly I can't offer a single incidence in Western History where buying off one's enemies worked. Even the Danes ultimately wanted more than their "Danegelt" from England.

All in all, this is a very fine work, worthy of five stars plus.

It's almost beyond argument that the sudden appearance of the Huns in 4th century eastern Europe helped precipitate the fall of the Roman Empire. The difficulty for any historian of the period is to tell the story of both Huns and Fall from the random scraps of literary and archaeological evidence that have survived antiquity.

Christopher Kelly writes well enough and makes good use of the slender extant materials, especially fragments of Priscus's History of Attila. Following Priscus, Kelly argues that Attila was no irrational barbarian but a sophisticated ruler who played a clever hand in contemporary international politics.

This view is hardly revisionist. Kelly's thesis might almost be summarized from The Columbia Encyclopedia, 3rd edition (1963): "The fear Attila inspired is clear from many accounts of his savagery but, though undoubtedly harsh, he was a just ruler to his own people. He encouraged the presence of learned Romans at his court and was far less bent on devastation than other conquerors before and after him."

End of Empire seems aimed at the History-Book-Club-sort of general reader, and the question these folks will have to answer for themselves before tackling this book is the degree to which they are willing to put up with all the surmises, "perhapses," and "probablys" almost necessary to creating a coherent extended narrative such as this one.

The name "Attila the Hun" is centuries-old shorthand for the senseless, destructive fury of barbarian hordes unleashed upon civilization, bent soley upon its destruction. In his new biography of Attila, Christopher Kelly debunks this stereotype. He instead depicts the legendary Hun as an effective, dynamic monarch and warlord with a sophisticated, nuanced approach to strategy and tactics, purposefully building and maintaining a powerful Hunnic kingdom. Through close examination of the historical record and evidence from recent archaeological finds, Kelly tries in this history to determine what can be known of Attila's character and life.

One of the chief primary sources of information is the account by the Byzantine rhetorician Priscus of his encounter with Attila as part of a diplomatic mission. Priscus's account unfortunately only survives in epitomized fragments from a later Byzantine work, but by close analysis of what remains, Kelly draws some interesting conclusions. He pays particular attention to an official banquet given by Attila, notes the monarch's moderation, his subtle handling of the Byzantine delegation, and the richness of the food, all in stark contrast to the usual old wives tales of Huns dressed in mouseskins, squatting outdoors, eating half-raw meat.

Kelly succinctly and briskly relates how, through a clever combination of negotiation, threats, and military action, Attila was able to play off both halves of the decaying Roman Empire against one another and thereby extract tribute and increased territory. He notes that despite the Huns' fearsome reputation as the worst of the barbarians, they skirted the Empire's edges and never sought to occupy and hold Roman provinces like the Goths or the Vandals. Kelly also points out that the Huns sometimes received some rough handling from Roman troops, again in opposition to the myth of an irresistible, all-conquering horde. Most importantly, Kelly clearly explains the interplay between the Huns with their pressure against the Empire, and that of other hostile peoples such as the Persians to the East and the Goths and Vandals in the West. He shows how this combination of forces acclerated the Roman Empire's decay, in the West to its utter destruction.

I recommend this book both to laymen who are interested in learning about late antiquity and to those with a deeper interest as well. It is relatively short and well written. There are also extensive notes in the back for those interested in reading more deeply on this subject.