Xiongnu: A Powerful Force on the East Asian Steppes

According to ancient Chinese texts, the Xiongnu were a nomadic tribe who lived on the eastern Eurasian Steppe from the third century BC until the late first century AD. The Xiongnu Empire was formed after 209 BC, according to Chinese historians. Modu Chanyu is the ultimate leader. The Xiongnu became a powerful force on the East Asian steppes, centred on Mongolia's current opponents, when its former opponents, the Yuezhi, moved into Central Asia around the 2nd century BC. The Xiongnu were also active in Siberia, Inner Mongolia, Gansu, and Xinjiang, which are now part of China. Their relationships with neighboring Chinese dynasties to the southeast were complicated, with periods of strife and intrigue interspersed with tribute exchanges, trade agreements, and marriage contracts.  As one of the Five Barbarians, they created numerous dynasty kingdoms in northern China during the Sixteen Kingdoms period, including Former Zhao, Northern Liang, and Xia.  Attempts to link the Xiongnu to subsequent tribes of the western Eurasian Steppe have been met with scepticism. For example, Scythians and Sarmatians were both to the west at the same time. Because just a few words, mostly titles and personal names were survived in Chinese texts, the ethnic core of Xiongnu has been the focus of several speculations. Although this is debatable, the name Xiongnu may be related to the Huns or Huna. Iranian, Mongolic, Turkic, Uralic, Yeniseian, Tibeto-Burman, or multiethnic are some of the other linguistic linkages claimed by researchers, all of which are disputed.

Early History

It mentions that Xiongnu's progenitor was a probable descendant of the Xia dynasty's kings by the name of Chunwei. It also distinguishes between the settled Huaxia people (Chinese) and the pastoral nomads (Xiongnu), describing them as two polar groupings regarding a civilised versus an uncivilised society: the Hua–Yi difference. The Xiongnu are frequently classified as Hu people in pre-Han texts, a generic word for nomadic peoples that only acquired an ethnonym for the Xiongnu during the Han. Ancient China frequently encountered the Xianyun and Xirong nomadic peoples. Some of these peoples were thought to be the probable progenitors of the Xiongnu people in later Chinese history. These nomadic people were frequently engaged in military battles with the Shang and, in particular, the Zhou, who frequently subjugated and enslaved the nomads as part of their expansion drive. During the Warring States period, armies from the Qin, Zhao, and Yan kingdoms encroached on and captured various nomadic territories inhabited by the Xiongnu and other Hu peoples. The Xiongnu, according to Sinologist Edwin Pulleyblank, were members of a Xirong tribe named Yiqu, who had resided in Shaanbei for generations and had been influenced by China before being pushed out by the Qin dynasty. Qin's campaign against the Xiongnu increased Qin's territory while the Xiongnu lost ground. Following the unification of the Qin dynasty, Xiongnu posed a danger to the Qin's northern frontier. When they faced natural calamities, they were prone to attack the Qin dynasty. Qin Shi Huang dispatched General Meng Tian in 215 BC to conquer the Xiongnu and force them out of the Ordos Loop, which he accomplished later that year. Touman, the Xiongnu leader, was forced to escape deep into the Mongolian Plateau after his disastrous loss at the hands of Meng Tian. The Xiongnu were threatened by the Qin empire, which led to the unification of the numerous tribes into a confederacy.

State Formation

The Xiongnu were gathered together in a formidable confederation under a new chanyu, Modu Chanyu, in 209 BC, three years before Han China was founded. They were a more powerful state due to their new political unity, which allowed them to assemble larger armies and greater strategic cooperation. The Xiongnu adopted numerous Chinese agricultural methods, including slaves for heavy labour, the wearing of silk, and living in Chinese-style houses. The reason for the confederation's establishment is unknown. The necessity for a stronger state was suggested in response to the Qin unification of China, which resulted in the loss of the Ordos area to Meng Tian, or the political crisis that engulfed the Xiongnu in 215 BC when Qin soldiers expelled them from their Yellow River meadows. Modu Chanyu enlarged his dominion on all sides after achieving internal harmony. He subdued several nomadic peoples in the north, notably the Dingling of southern Siberia. His son, Jizhu, broke the power of the Donghu people of eastern Mongolia and Manchuria and the Yuezhi in Gansu's Hexi Corridor, where he cut a skull cup out of the Yuezhi king.  Modu also reclaimed all of the territories that the Qin commander Meng Tian had seized. Under Modu's management, the Xiongnu threatened the Han dynasty, causing Emperor Gaozu, the first Han emperor, to abdicate his throne in 200 BC.  The Xiongnu had pushed the Yuezhi out of the Hexi Corridor by the time Modu died in 174 BC, murdering the Yuezhi monarch in the process and establishing their position in the Western Regions. The Xiongnu were the most notable of the nomads surrounding the Chinese Han empire. The former maintained the balance of power throughout the early ties between the Xiongnu and the Han.

Xiongnu Hierarchy

Following Modu, succeeding leaders established a dualistic system of political organisation, dividing the Xiongnu into left and right branches on a geographical basis. The chanyu or shanyu, a monarch comparable to the Emperor of China, directly ruled over the centre area. Longcheng became the Xiongnu capital and the yearly gathering location. Longcheng ruins were discovered in 2017 south of Ulziit District, Arkhangai Province. The Chanyu was the name of the Xiongnu's monarch. The Tuqi Kings were his subordinates. Normally, the Tuqi King of the Left was the presumed heir. The guli, army commanders, great governors, danghu, and gudu were the next officials to come lower in the hierarchy, in pairs to the left and right. The commanders of detachments of a thousand, one hundred, and ten soldiers were stationed under them. Thus, this nomadic country, a people on the move, was organised in the manner of an army.  The Chanyu's main camp is north of Shanxi, with the Tuqi King of the Left controlling the territory north of Beijing and the Tuqi King of the Right holding the Ordos Loop area as far as Gansu, according to Yap. Grousset places the Chanyu on the upper Orkhon River near where Genghis Khan would eventually construct his city of Karakorum, most likely after the Xiongnu were forced north. The Left Tuqi King dwelt in the east, most likely on the high Kherlen River. The Tuqi King of the Right reigned in the Khangai Mountains, maybe around Uliastai today.

Marriage Diplomacy with Han China

Following a Xiongnu siege of Taiyuan in 200 BC, Emperor Gaozu of Han personally led a military expedition against Modu Chanyu. He was ambushed at the Battle of Baideng, allegedly by Xiongnu cavalry. For seven days, the emperor was cut off from supplies and reinforcements, narrowly avoiding capture. To suppress the border attacks, the Han sent princesses to marry Xiongnu chiefs. In addition to arranged marriages, the Han offered to the Xiongnu to persuade them to cease invading. The Han emperor uninhibited a military solution to the Xiongnu threat after the defeat at Pingcheng in 200 BC. Instead, Liu Jing, a courtier, was despatched to negotiate in 198 BC. The parties eventually reached a deal that included the marriage of a Han princess to the chanyu, regular payments of silk, distilled beverages, and rice to the Xiongnu, equal status between the states, and a shared border wall. This first treaty set the tone for Han-Xiongnu relations for the following sixty years. Between 135 BC and 135 AD, the treaty was extended nine times, and each time with a rise in the "gifts" to the Xiongnu Empire. Modun even requested Emperor Gaozu of Han widow Empress Lü Zhi's hand in marriage in 192 BC. The energetic Jiyu, also known as the Laoshang Chanyu, was his son and heir, and he followed his father's expansionist goals. Emperor Wen agreed to Laoshang's conditions for the continuation of a large-scale government-sponsored market system. While the Xiongnu benefitted handsomely, marriage contracts were expensive, humiliating, and unsuccessful from the Chinese standpoint. Laoshang Chanyu shown that he was unconcerned with the peace pact. His scouts broke through to a point near Chang'an on one occasion. He led 140,000 cavalries into Anding in 166 BC, reaching the imperial refuge at Yong. His successor dispatched 30,000 cavalries to assault Shangdang and another 30,000 to attack Yunzhong in 158 BC. The Xiongnu also made marriage connections with Han dynasty officers and officials who switched to their side. The Chanyu's sister married the Xiongnu General Zhao Xin, the Marquis of Xi, who served the Han dynasty. After the Han Chinese General Li Ling surrendered and defected, Chanyu's daughter married him. Li Guangli, a commander in the War of the Heavenly Horses who married a Chanyu daughter, was another Han Chinese general who defected to the Xiongnu. Su Wu, a Han Chinese ambassador, married a Xiongnu lady provided to him by Li Ling when he was apprehended and kidnapped. When the Xiongnu kidnapped Han Chinese explorer Zhang Qian, he married a Xiongnu lady and had a child. When the Eastern Jin kingdom fell apart, the Han Chinese Jin prince Sima Chuzhi was considered a refugee by the Xianbei Northern Wei. Sima Chuzhi married a Northern Wei Xianbei Princess, and Sima Jinlong was born. Sima Jinlong married Northern Liang Xiongnu King Juqu Mujian's daughter.

Han-Xiongnu War

Han Emperor Wu dispatched Han Chinese explorer Zhang Qian to investigate the mystery kingdoms to the west and seek an alliance with the Yuezhi people to battle the Xiongnu. The Han dynasty began war preparations. During this period, Zhang married a Xiongnu woman and had a son, earning the Xiongnu leader's trust. While Zhang Qian's expedition failed, his reports from the west gave the Chinese even more motivation to break the Xiongnu's control on western ways out of China. They planned to launch a large-scale offensive utilising the Northern Silk Road to transport troops and materials. While Han China had been planning a military conflict since Emperor Wen's reign, the split did not occur until 133 BC, after an unsuccessful attempt to ambush the chanyu at Mayi. By that time, the empire had become politically, militarily, and economically stable, and a daring pro-war court group governed it. In that year, Emperor Wu revoked his decision to extend the peace pact from the previous year. In the fall of 129 BC, 40,000 Chinese cavalrymen made a surprise attack on the Xiongnu at the border markets, resulting in full-scale combat. Wei Qing, a Han commander, retook Ordos in 127 BC. The Xiongnu were dealt another blow in 121 BC when Huo Qubing led a troop of light cavalry westward from Longxi and battled his way through five Xiongnu kingdoms in six days. With 40,000 soldiers, the Xiongnu Hunye monarch was compelled to submit. In 119 BC, Huo and Wei, each leading 50,000 cavalrymen and 100,000 footsoldiers (to keep up with the Xiongnu's mobility, many non-cavalry Han troops were mobile infantrymen who went on horseback but battled on foot), drove the chanyu and his Xiongnu court to escape north of the Gobi Desert.

Logistical issues severely hampered the length and long-term viability of these efforts. The challenges, according to Yan You's view, were threefold. Then there was the issue of delivering meals over large distances. Second, the weather in the northern Xiongnu territories made it impossible for Han forces to transport adequate fuel. Official sources claim that the Xiongnu lost 80,000 to 90,000 soldiers and that only 30,000 of the 140,000 horses sent into the desert by Han armies returned to China. Third, the Han battled and defeated the Kingdom of Dayuan in the War of the Heavenly Horses in 104 and 102 BC. As a result, the Han were able to acquire many Ferghana horses, which assisted them in their fight against the Xiongnu. The Chinese gained control of the key territory from the Ordos and Gansu corridor to Lop Nor due to these wars. They separated the Xiongnu and Qiang peoples to the south and obtained direct access to the Western Regions. The Xiongnu became unstable due to strict Chinese rule and were no longer a danger to the Han Chinese. Ban Chao, the Han dynasty's Protector General, led an army of 70,000 men in a war against the Xiongnu remnants who were disturbing the Silk Road trading route. One Xiongnu tribe after another was subjugated after his victorious military assault. Ban Chao also dispatched an ambassador to Daqin called Gan Ying (Rome).  Ban Chao was made Marquess of Dingyuan for his contributions to the Han Empire, and at the age of 70, he returned to the capital Luoyang, where he died in the year 102. Following his death, the Xiongnu's dominance in the Western Regions grew once again, and following dynasties' rulers did not reach as far west until the Tang dynasty.

Xiongnu Civil War

If Chanyu's son was not of legal age when he died, the authority might pass to his younger sibling. Like Gaelic tanistry, this system usually kept an adult male on the king, although it may pose problems in subsequent centuries if multiple lineages claimed the crown. After the 12th Chanyu died in 60 BC, Woyanqudi, a 12th Chanyu's cousin, ascended to the throne. As a usurper, he attempted to install his men in authority, which only added to his adversaries' ranks. The son of the 12th Chanyu went east and rebelled in 58 BC. Woyanqudi was driven to suicide by a lack of support, leaving Huhanye, the rebel son, as the 14th Chanyu. His brother, Tuqi, was later installed as Chanyu by the Woyanqudi faction (58 BC).  Three additional persons called themselves Chanyu in 57 BC. Two of the three relinquished their claims favouring the third, beaten by Tuqi that year and submitted to Huhanye the next year. Tuqi was beaten by Huhanye in 56 BC and committed suicide, but Runzhen and Huhanye's elder brother Zhizhi Chanyu emerged as new claimants. In 54 BC, Zhizhi murdered Runzhen, leaving just Zhizhi and Huhanye. Huhanye went south and surrendered to the Chinese in 53 BC as Zhizhi rose in power. Huhanye utilised Chinese assistance to weaken Zhizhi, who advanced west gradually. In 49 BC, Tuqi's brother impersonated Chanyu and was murdered by Zhizhi. Zhizhi was slain by a Chinese army in 36 BC while creating a new kingdom near Lake Balkhash in the far west.

Tributary Relations with the Han

Huhanye chose to form tributary relations with Han China around 53 BC. The Han court insisted on three conditions: first, the Chanyu or his agents must pay respect at the capital; second, the Chanyu must send a hostage prince; and third, the Chanyu must pay tribute to the Han emperor. The Xiongnu's political standing inside the Chinese global system was downgraded from a "brotherly state" to "outer vassal." The Xiongnu, on the other hand, retained political sovereignty and geographical integrity during this time. Between Han and Xiongnu, the Great Wall of China continued to act as a dividing line. Huhanye sent his son, Shuloujutang, the "learned king of the right," to the Han court as a captive. On the Lunar New Year in 51 BC, he paid a personal visit to Chang'an to pay tribute to the emperor. Another envoy, Qijushan, was met at the Ganquan Palace in modern-day Shanxi the same year. Huhanye was well compensated financially for his cooperation, receiving enormous sums of gold, cash, clothing, silk, horses, and grain. Huhanye made two more homage visits in 49 BC and 33 BC, increasing the imperial presents. Huhanye used his last journey to request that he be permitted to marry an imperial son-in-law. Emperor Yuan declined, instead offering him five ladies-in-waiting to indicate the Xiongnu's declining political standing. Wang Zhaojun, renowned in Chinese mythology as one of the Four Beauties, was one of them.  In 53 BC, when Zhizhi learnt of his brother's surrender, he sent a son as a hostage to the Han court. He then dispatched envoys with a tribute to the Han court twice, in 51 BC and 50 BC. He was never accepted to the tributary system since he neglected to pay personal respect. In 36 BC, a junior officer called Chen Tang gathered an invading army with Gan Yanshou, protector-general of the Western Regions, that defeated him at the Battle of Zhizhi and delivered his head to Chang'an prize. During the reign of Huduershi (18 AD–48), tributary connections were abolished, coinciding with China's Xin Dynasty's political turmoil. The Xiongnu saw this as a chance to reclaim control of the western territories and adjacent peoples like the Wuhuan. Hudershi even proposed inverting the tributary system around 24 AD.

Southern Xiongnu and Northern Xiongnu

Emperor Guangwu responded to the Xiongnu's increased strength with a strategy of conciliation. Huduershi likened himself to his great grandfather Modu at the height of his reign. Huduershi, on the other hand, was never able to establish absolute power among the Xiongnu due to rising regionalism. Huduershi chose his son Punu as heir-apparent, in violation of Huhanye's concept of brotherly succession. Bi (Pi), the Rizhu King of the Right, had a more valid claim as the eldest son of the prior chanyu. As a result, Bi declined to attend the chanyu's court's annual meeting. Punu did, however, accede to the throne in 46 AD. A coalition of eight Xiongnu tribes in Bi's southern power base seceded from Punu's kingdom in 48 AD. It proclaimed Bi as chanyu, with a military force of 40,000 to 50,000 soldiers. The Southern Xiongnu was the name given to this kingdom.

Later Xiongnu States in Northern China

During the Eastern Han dynasty, the Southern Xiongnu who moved to northern China kept their tribal allegiance and political structure and played an active role in Chinese politics. Southern Xiongnu commanders created or controlled numerous kingdoms during the Sixteen Kingdoms (304–439 CE), including Liu Yuan's Han Zhao Kingdom (Former Zhao), Helian Bobo's Xia, and Juqu Mengxun's Northern Liang. Tuge, Koutou, Xianzhi, Wutan, Chile, Hanzhi, Heilang, Chisha, Yugang, Weisuo, Tutong, Bomie, Qiangqu, Helai, Zhongqin, Dalou, Yongqu, Zhenshu, and Lijie are the nineteen Xiongnu tribes mentioned in Fang Xuanling's Book of Jin.   Chanyu of the Five Hordes was Liu Yuan's title in 304. In 308, he established the Han Zhao Dynasty and crowned himself emperor. Liu Cong, his son and successor, captured Luoyang and Emperor Huai of Jin China in 311. Emperor Min of Jin China was detained at Chang'an in the year 316. Before being killed in 313 and 318, both emperors were humiliated as cupbearers in Linfen. After that, the Xiongnu dominated North China, while the Jin dynasty's remnants lingered in Jiankang in the south.

After putting down a coup by a powerful minister in the Xiongnu-Han court (in which the emperor and a large portion of the aristocracy were massacred), the Xiongnu prince Liu Yao moved the Xiongnu-Han capital from Pingyang to Chang'an and renamed the dynasty Zhao (Liu Yuan had declared the empire's name Han to create a linkage (However, this was not a departure from Liu Yuan, as he continued to respect both Liu Yuan and Liu Cong posthumously; historians collectively refer to this as Han Zhao.) However, a renegade Xiongnu-Han general of Jie heritage named Shi Le took control of the eastern section of north China. Liu Yao and Shi Le fought a protracted war until Liu Yao was captured and executed in battle in 329. Shi Le shortly conquered Chang'an, and Shi Le obliterated the Xiongnu empire. For the next 20 years, Shi Le's Later Zhao dynasty ruled North China. The "Liu" Xiongnu, on the other hand, remained active in the north for at least another century.

Between the Former Qin empire's destruction of the Tuoba Xianbei state of Dai in 376 and its restoration as the Northern Wei in 386, the northern Tiefu branch of the Xiongnu acquired dominance of Inner Mongolian territory. The Tiefu were progressively annihilated by or surrendered to the Tuoba after 386, with the yielding Tiefu dubbed the Dugu. A surviving Tiefu prince, Liu Bobo, fled to the Ordos Loop. He created the Xia (named after the Xiongnu's alleged descent from the Xia dynasty) and changed his surname to Helian. The Northern Wei invaded the Helian-Xia empire in 428–31, and the Xiongnu effectively disappeared from Chinese history after integrating with the Xianbei and Han races. The capital of the Xia (Sixteen Kingdoms), whose emperors claimed descent from Modu Chanyu, was Tongwancheng (meaning "Unify All Nations"). In 1996, State Council discovered the wrecked city, and the State Council recognised it as a cultural relic to be protected at all costs. The Yong'an Platform, where Helian Bobo, the Da Xia regime's emperor, reviewed parade troops, repaired, and the 31-meter-tall tower will be restored next.

The Juqu were a Xiongnu subgroup. Juqu Mengxun, their leader, overthrew Duan Ye, the former puppet ruler of Northern Liang. The Northern Wei had defeated the Juqu power by 439. Their stragglers eventually settled in Gaochang before being annihilated by the Rouran.

For a steppe empire, the Xiongnu confederation lasted an exceptionally long time. Raids on China were carried out not only for the aim of obtaining goods but also to compel the Chinese to pay regular tribute. The Xiongnu ruler's authority was derived from his command of Chinese tribute, which he utilised to reward his followers. Because the Xiongnu kingdom was reliant on Chinese tribute, the Han and Xiongnu empires rose simultaneously. The practice of lateral succession was a significant Xiongnu flaw. If a dead ruler's kid was not old enough to take charge, the late ruler's sibling was given the power that worked in the first generation, but it may lead to civil war in the second generation. When this happened for the first time in 60 BC, the weaker side used Barfield as the "inner frontier approach." They marched south, surrendered to China, and then utilised Chinese resources to destroy the Northern Xiongnu and restore the empire. The plan failed the second time around, about 47 AD. The Xiongnu remained split because the southern king was unable to overcome the northern ruler.

The Xiongnu's Chinese name was a derogatory epithet in and of themselves since the letters indicate "fierce slave." There are numerous ideas on the Xiongnu's ethnolinguistic identity.

Huns

The initial Chinese character in the name has been rebuilt to sound how it does in Old Chinese. This sound is said to be related to the European language term "Hun." The second character, which appears to have no equivalent in a Western language, implies slave. It isn't easy to discern if the resemblance is proof of connection or just a coincidence. It may support the notion that the Huns were descended from the Northern Xiongnu who went westward. On the other hand, it could support the argument that the Huns adopted a name from the Northern Xiongnu.

On the other hand, it could support the theory that the Xiongnu were a component of the Hun confederation. The Xiongnu-Hun theory was first presented by Joseph de Guignes, an 18th-century French historian. They noted that ancient Chinese academics had given tribes linked with the Xiongnu names close to the name "Hun" but with different Chinese characters. According to Étienne de la Vaissière, the Xiongnu and the Huns were referred to as the wn (xwn) in the Sogdian script used in the so-called "Sogdian Ancient Letters," suggesting that the two names were identical. Many academics now accept the notion that the Xiongnu were the forerunners of the Huns as they were subsequently known in Europe. However, it has yet to become a consensus position. It's conceivable that the Huns' identification is incorrect or simplified too much.   

Iranian Theories

Harold Walter Bailey postulated an Iranian origin for the Xiongnu, claiming that all of the 2nd century BC Xiongnu names were of the Iranian kind. Henryk Jankowski, a turkologist, agrees with this hypothesis. The term Xiongnu might be a cognate of Scythian, Saka, and Sogdia, according to Central Asian historian Christopher I. Beckwith, and relate to a moniker for Northern Iranians. According to Beckwith, the Xiongnu may have had a significant Iranian component when they first arrived. Still, it's more probable that they were previously subjects of an Iranian people who taught them the Iranian nomadic model. János Harmatta, the editor of the UNESCO-published History of Civilisations of Central Asia, claims that the Xiongnu royal tribes and kings had Iranian names. All Xiongnu terms recorded by the Chinese may be explained by a Scythian language, while the bulk of Xiongnu tribes spoke an Eastern Iranian language.

Mongolic Theories

Mongolian and other academics have proposed that the Xiongnu spoke a Mongolic-like language. Mongolian archaeologists have hypothesised that the Slab Grave Culture people were the Xiongnu's forefathers, while other academics have speculated that the Xiongnu were the Mongols' ancestors. According to 'Book of Song,' the Rourans had the alternate names Dàtán "Tatar" and Tántán "Tartar," and according to Book of Liang, "they also comprised a distinct branch of the Xiongnu;" Nikita Bichurin regarded the Xiongnu and Xianbei to be two. Other nomadic groups, such as Turkic-speaking Göktürks and Tiele, and Para-Mongolic-speaking Kumo Xi and Khitans, were commonly given Xiongnu genealogy Chinese chroniclers. In a letter to Daoist Qiu Chuji, Genghis Khan alludes to the time of Modu Chanyu as "the faraway times of our Chanyu." The sun and moon sign unearthed by archaeologists in Xiongnu is comparable to the Mongolian Soyombo symbol.

Turkic Theories

Julius Klaproth, E.H. Parker, Jean-Pierre Abel-Rémusat, Kurakichi Shiratori, Gustaf John Ramstedt, Annemarie von Gabain, and Omeljan Pritsak are among the proponents of a Turkic language theory. According to certain accounts, the ruling elite was proto-Turkic. Craig Benjamin believes the Xiongnu were either proto-Turks or proto-Mongols who spoke a Dingling-like language. According to Chinese texts, the Tiele people and the Ashina clan were both members of the Xiongnu confederation. Rendering to the Book of Zhou and the History of the Northern Dynasties, the Ashina clan was a part of the Xiongnu confederation. In addition, Uyghur Khagans claimed Xiongnu heritage. In the 7th-century Chinese History of the Northern Dynasties and the Book of Zhou, a Sogdian inscription, the Göktürks are described as a subgroup of the Xiongnu.

Yeniseian Theories

The first person to argue that the Xiongnu spoke a Yeniseian language was Lajos Ligeti. Edwin Pulleyblank was the first to support this theory with facts in the early 1960s. Alexander Vovin used the most recent reconstruction of Old Chinese phonology by Starostin and Baxter, as well as a single Chinese transcription of a sentence in the language of the Jie people, a member tribe of the Xiongnu Confederacy, to reexamine Pulleyblank's argument and find additional support for it in 2000. Previous Turkic translations of the above statement do not match the Chinese translation as closely as Yeniseian grammar does. According to Pulleybank and D. N. Keightley, "were essentially Siberian terms but were later adopted by Turkic and Mongolic peoples." The Xiongnu language provided several significant cultural terms to the subsequent Turkic and Mongolian empires, notably Turkic tängri, Mongolian tenggeri, originally the Xiongnu word for "heaven," chengli. Titles like tarqan, tegin, and kaghan were acquired from the Xiongnu language and are most likely Yeniseian in origin. The Xiongnu term for "heaven," for example, is said to have originated in Proto-Yeniseian. The presence of starting r and l and initial clusters in Xiongnu make it improbable that it was an Altaic language, according to Edwin G. Pulleyblank, and many terms in Xiongnu resemble Yeniseian languages. And that the simplest explanation is that the Xiongnu spoke a Yeniseian language and that the Turkic and Mongolic peoples acquired Xiongnu components. In Xiongnu, which is also present in the Ket people, Haplogroup Q accounts for roughly 94 per cent of the population. Many Xiongnu terms, such as Xiongnu "sakdak" 'boot' and Ket "saagdi" 'boot,' Xiongnu kwala'son,' and Ket qalek 'grandson,' appear to have Yeniseian cognates. The Xiongnu, according to Vovin (2007), spoke a Yeniseian language. They might have been a Yeniseian offshoot from the south.

Multiple Ethnicities

Several Western academics have postulated a link between several language families or subfamilies and the Xiongnu language or languages from the early nineteenth century. They were multi-component groupings, according to Albert Terrien de Lacouperie. Many academics think that the Xiongnu confederation was a mash-up of many ethnolinguistic groupings. Their primary language (as shown in Chinese texts) and its connections have yet to be identified properly. Kim criticises "conventional racial conceptions or even ethnic affiliations" favouring the "historical reality of these huge, multiethnic, polyglot steppe empires." According to Chinese texts, not all Turkic peoples are related to the Xiongnu. Conferring to the Book of Zhou and the History of the Northern Dynasties, the Ashina clan was a part of the Xiongnu confederation. However, this link is contested, and according to the Book of Sui and the Tongdian, they were "mixed nomads" from Pingliang. The Ashina and Tiele might have been distinct ethnic tribes that mingled with the Xiongnu. Many nomadic peoples on China's northern frontiers are referred to as "Xiongnu" by Chinese sources, just as Avars and Huns were referred to as "Scythians" by Greco-Roman historians. In his work De Administrando Imperio, the Byzantine emperor and scholar Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus employed the Greek cognate of Tourkia, but "Turks" always referred to Magyars. This type of archaising was a frequent literary topos, implying comparable geographical origins and itinerant lifestyles but not direct filiation. Although some Uyghurs claim to be descended from the Xiongnu, many contemporary scholars do not believe that the modern Uyghurs are of direct linear descent from the old Uyghur Khaganate because the modern and old Uyghur languages are distinct. Rather, they see them as descended from a variety of people, including the ancient Uyghurs. King Munmu of Silla had Xiongnu origin, according to several ancient inscriptions found on his monuments. It is probable, according to some historians, that there were Koreanic tribes. Some Korean academics have also noted that the burial items from Silla and the eastern Xiongnu are similar.

Language Isolate Theories

Gerhard Doerfer, a Turkologist, has ruled out any link between the Xiongnu language and any other known language, including Turkic and Mongolian.

Steppe archaeologists disagree with the Xiongnu's initial geographic location. Since the 1960s, archaeologists have sought to trace the Xiongnu's origins by examining Early Iron Age burial structures. No other area has been found to have funerary rituals that are identical to the Xiongnu.

Archaeology

Pyotr Kozlov's excavations of the first-century CE royal tombs at the Noin-Ula burial site in northern Mongolia provided a glimpse into the Xiongnu's lost civilisation in the 1920s. In Inner Mongolia, more archaeological sites have been discovered. Among them is the Inner Mongolian Ordos civilisation, which has been recognised as a Xiongnu culture. According to Sinologist Otto Maenchen-Helfen, representations of the Xiongnu of Transbaikalia and the Ordos portray people with "Europoid" characteristics. Europoid representations in the Ordos region, according to Iaroslav Lebedynsky, should be linked to a "Scythian affinity." Other cultural evidence and influences, such as portraits discovered in the Noin-Ula excavations, reveal that Chinese and Xiongnu art have mutually affected one another. The Xiongnu are also depicted in several embroidered portraits in the Noin-Ula kurgans with long braided hair with broad ribbons, which appears identical to the Ashina clan hairstyle. Both Mongoloid and Caucasian characteristics can be seen in well-preserved remains in Xiongnu and pre-Xiongnu graves in the Mongolian Republic and southern Siberia.

The identification of dolichocephalic Mongoloids, ethnically different from adjacent groups in modern-day Mongolia, is based on skeletal remains from several locations assigned to the Xiongnu. According to Russian and Chinese anthropological and cranial research, the Xiongnu were physically highly heterogeneous, with six distinct demographic groups displaying varying degrees of Mongoloid and Caucasoid physical characteristics. Ivolga, Dyrestui, Burkhan Tolgoi, and Daodunzi are the four fully excavated and well-documented cemeteries that remain today. In Transbaikalia and Mongolia, tens of thousands of graves have been discovered. The Tamir 1 excavation site from the Silkroad Arkanghai Excavation Project in 2005 is Mongolia's sole completely mapped Xiongnu cemetery. Tamir 1 was discovered alongside other Neolithic, Bronze Age, and Mongol graves on Tamiryn Ulaan Khoshuu, a notable granitic outcrop. Glass beads, lacquer bowl, and three TLV mirrors were among the important findings at the site. Together with the general richness and magnitude of the tombs, these items lead archaeologists from this study to think that this cemetery was for more prominent or affluent Xiongnu people. The TLV mirrors are particularly fascinating. Three mirrors were found at the site in three separate graves. The mirror discovered at feature 160 is thought to be a low-quality, local copy of a Han mirror, but the entire mirror located at feature 100 and pieces of a mirror found at feature 109 are thought to be traditional TLV mirrors dating from the Xin Dynasty or early to middle Eastern Han era. For the most part, archaeologists have refrained from making any conclusions regarding Han-Xiongnu ties based on these specific mirrors.  They did, however, agree to mention the following: "There is no clear indication of the ethnicity of the tomb occupant, but archaeologists discovered a bronze seal with the official title bestowed upon the Xiongnu leader by the Han government in a similar brick-chambered tomb from the late Eastern Han period at the same cemetery. According to the archaeologists, these brick chamber tombs all belong to the Xiongnu (Qinghai 1993)."  These burial sites are divided into two types of graves: "(1) massive stepped terrace tombs frequently surrounded by minor "satellite" burials, and (2) 'circular' or 'ring' burials," according to classifications. According to some researchers, this is a distinction between "elite" and "commoner" burials. However, other scholars believe that this division is too simplistic and does not elicit a true distinction because it demonstrates "unawareness of the nature of the mortuary investments and naturally flourishing burial assemblages, as well as the discovery of other less significant interments that do not qualify as either of these types."

DNA research published in the American Journal of Human Genetics in July 2003 looked at the remains of 62 people buried in the Xiongnu necropolis in Egyin Gol, northern Mongolia, between the 3rd and 2nd centuries BC. The majority of the people tested were of East Asian descent. Significant genetic continuity was discovered between the studied people at Egyin Gol and current Mongols, according to DNA research published in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology in October 2006. Lihongjie (2012) examined the Y-DNA of samples from Heigouliang in Xinjiang, which is said to have served as a summer residence for Xiongnu rulers. The Y-DNA of 12 men unearthed from the site belonged to either Q-MEH2 (Q1a) or Q-M378(Q1b) haplogroups.  Half of the Q-MEH2 males looked to be hosts, while the other half appeared to be sacrificial victims.

Similarly, three samples from a Xiongnu site in Barkol, Xinjiang, were identified as Q-M3(Q1a2a1a1) by L. L. Kang et al. (2013). Three persons were buried at an aristocratic Xiongnu cemetery in Duurlig Nars, Northeast Mongolia, about 0 AD, according to DNA research published in the American Journal of Physical Anthropology in July 2010. The paternal haplogroup C3 was found in one guy, whereas the maternal haplotype D4 was found. The female has the maternal haplogroup D4 as well. The third person, a male, had the R1a1 paternal haplogroup and the U2e1 maternal haplotype. C3 and D4 are found in Northeast Asia, R1a1 is found in Eurasia, and U2e1 is found in West Eurasia. The bones of five Xiongnu were studied in DNA research published in Nature in May 2018. The four Y-DNA samples were from haplogroups R1, R1b, O3a, and O3a3b2, while the five mtDNA samples were from haplogroups D4b2b4, N9a2a, G3a3, D4a6, and D4b2b2b. The Xiongnu studied were determined to be of mixed East Asian and West Eurasian heritage, with a higher proportion of East Asian ancestry than the Sakas, Wusun, and Kangju. According to the evidence, the Huns sprang from the westward migrations of East Asian nomads (particularly Xiongnu tribe members) and later mixing with Sakas. Three people were buried in Hunnic cemeteries in the Carpathian Basin in the 5th century AD, according to DNA research published in Scientific Reports in November 2019. The study's findings backed with the notion that the Huns descended from the Xiongnu. DNA research published in Human Genetics in July 2020 that looked at the remains of 52 people discovered at Mongolia's Tamir Ulaan Khoshuu cemetery suggests that the Xiongnu's forebears were a mix of Scythians and Siberians and that the Huns are their offspring.

Conferring to the Book of Han, the Xiongnu named Heaven ' Chēnglí,' a Chinese translation of Tengri.

Artistic Distinctions

Although there is greater diversity from site to the site than from "period" to "era" in Chinese chronology, the Xiongnu civilisation as a whole is unique from that of the Han and other individuals of the non-Chinese north. Because art portraying animal predation is prevalent among the steppe peoples, iconography cannot always be utilised as the primary cultural identification. A tiger carrying dead prey is an illustration of animal predation linked with the Xiongnu civilisation. Work from Maoqinggou, a location that is thought to have been under Xiongnu governmental authority but is non-Xiongnu, shows a similar image. The prey is replaced by an extension of the tiger's foot in Maoqinggou. The art also shows a lesser degree of artistry; Maoqinggou work was more circular and less intricate. The gold headpiece from Aluchaideng and gold earrings with a turquoise and jade inlay found in Xigouban, Inner Mongolia, are examples of Xiongnu imagery representing animal predation in its widest sense. The gold headpiece and some other Xiongnu art specimens may be seen via the external links at the bottom of this page. It's more difficult to identify Xiongnu art from Saka or Scythian art. Although there were aesthetic similarities, Xiongnu and Saka art had significant differences in iconography. Predation scenarios, especially with dead prey and same-animal fights, do not appear to have been shown in Saka art. Saka art also contained features that were not found in Xiongnu imagery, such as a winged, horned horse. The two cultures also employed two distinct bird heads. Birds in Xiongnu representations tend to have a modest eye and beak and ears, whereas Saka birds have a prominent eye and beak but lack ears. Some researchers believe that these discrepancies are due to cultural variations. According to scholar Sophia-Karin Psarras, Xiongnu imagery of animal predation, particularly the tiger and prey, are spiritual, representing death and rebirth, and same-species conflict represents the acquisition or preservation of power.

Rock Art and Writing

The Yin and Helan Mountains have rock art dating from the 9th millennium BC to the 19th century AD. It mostly comprises carved marks (petroglyphs) with only a few painted pictures. Excavations in the Noin-Ula kurgans in 1924 and 1925 produced artefacts with about twenty carved characters that were either alike or very close to the runic letters of the Old Turkic alphabet discovered in the Orkhon Valley. Some academics believe the Xiongnu used a system akin to Eurasian runiform and that this alphabet was the foundation for early Turkic writing. The Xiongnu utilised a piece of wood to write down notes or transmit messages, as well as a "Hu script," according to the Records of the Grand Historian (vol. 110).

According to Chinese sources, the Xiongnu did not have an ideographic writing system like the Chinese. Even so, in the 2nd century BC, a rebel Chinese dignitary called Yue "trained the Shanyu to write formal letters to the Chinese court on a wooden tablet 31 cm long and utilise a seal and large-sized folder."  According to the same sources, the Xiongnu made incisions on a piece of wood ('ke-mu') when writing anything down or transmitting a message, and they also describe a "Hu script." Over 20 carved characters were unearthed at Noin-Ula and other Xiongnu burial sites in Mongolia and the region north of Lake Baikal. The majority of these characters are either identical or extremely close to letters found in the Eurasian steppes during the Early Middle Ages in the Old Turkic alphabet. Some experts believe the Xiongnu employed a system comparable to the ancient Eurasian runiform and that this alphabet served as a foundation for later Turkic writing.

Diet

The Xiongnu were a nomadic tribe that lived off the land. Their cuisine consists primarily of mutton, horse meat, and wild geese that have been shot down, based on their lifestyle of herding flocks and their horse trade with China.