1

Death of Richard Lionheart

Table of Contents
Death of Richard Lionheart

Death of Attila

Death of Richard Lionheart

If you kill a king, expect swift retribution.
Expect avengers.
Expect to not live long after you deal the final fatal blow to a royal
personage.
A boy, Pierre Basile, was executed on this date in 1199 for shooting
King Richard the Lionhearted* with an arrow expelled from his
crossbow.
The wound wasnt fatal to Richard I; the gangrene was. (French page)
Although the king pardoned the boy for the shot before dying,
Richards right hand man, French Provencal warrior Mercadier, would
hear none of it. After the kings death, Mercadier stormed Chateau de
Chalus-Chabrol, defended weakly by Basile, then flayed him alive
before hanging him.
Little is known of the boy defender. Also known as Bertran de Gurdun
and John Sabroz (the various names suggest well never know his real
name), Basile was one of only two knights defending the castle
against the kings siege.
This castle protected the southern approach to Limoges and was
betwixt routes from Paris and Spain and the Mediterranean Sea and
the Atlantic Ocean. The English army openly mocked its defenses as

the siege continued. The ramparts were cobbled together with

makeshift armor. A shield was constructed out of a frying pan.
Knowing the castle would fall sooner than later, the English were lax
in their siege, though eager for the riches inside. (Supposedly within
the castle walls was a treasure trove of Roman gold.)
Richard I, as feudal overlord, claimed it for himself and no boy
knights were going to get in his way. The king had been in the area
suppressing a revolt by Viscount Aimar V of Limoges. The viscounts
forces had been decimated by the kings army. The riches for the win
lay in the castle and Basile stood atop it.
It was early evening, March 25, 1199, when Richard walked around
the castle perimeter without his chainmail on. Arrows had been shot
from the ramparts by Basile but were paid little attention. The king
applauded when one arrow was aimed at him. The next arrow fired
struck the king in the left shoulder near the neck.
The king returned to the privacy of his tent to pull it out. He couldnt.
The surgeon Hoveden, Mercadiers personal physician, was
summoned. He removed the arrow, but not swiftly, or cleanly.
Gangrene quickly set in. The king asked for the crossbowman. The
boy, Basile, appeared before the stricken king, expecting to be
executed on the spot. The boy spoke first, saying he had tried to kill
Richard because the king had killed the boys father and two brothers.
Live on, the king replied, and by my bounty behold the light of
day.
He ordered the boy set free and, further, sent him away with 100
shillings. Deliriously jubilant at the kings decision, the boy quickly
returned to the castle.
On April 6, in the arms of his mother, Richard I died. His remains
were buried at the foot of the tower from which Basile shot the arrow.
And with the king died his chivalry towards Basile.
Mercadier, who had entered the kings service in 1184 and fought in
battles in Berry and Brittany, Flanders and Normandy, brought the
castles defenders to a swift and punishing death.
Hanging the defenders, he took the boy and flayed him first that is,
he removed the boys skin while he was still alive. Then Pierre Basile
was hung, and his body consigned in an unmarked grave.

Mercadier
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Mercadier (died 1200) was a famous Occitan warrior of the 12th
century, and chief of mercenaries in the service of Richard I, King of
England.
In 1183 he appears as a leader of Brabant mercenaries in Southern
France. He entered King Richard's service in 1184, attacking and
laying waste to lands of Aimar V of Limoges. In 1188 he managed
seventeen castles captured from the Count of Toulouse. He
accompanied Richard on the Third Crusade but was sent back when
Philip Augustus left for France. On arrival he and his mercenaries
defended Richard's estates in the latter's absence.
After Richard's return from the Holy Land, Mercadier accompanied
him everywhere as his right hand, travelling and fighting by his side.
Richard eulogized Mercadier's exploits in his letters, and gave him the
estates left by Ademar de Bainac in Limousin, who died without heirs
around 1190. During the various wars between Richard and Philip
Augustus of France, Mercadier fought successively in Berry,
Normandy, Flanders and Brittany. When Richard was mortally
wounded at the siege of Chlus in March 1199, it was Mercadier's
physician who cared for him. Mercadier avenged his death by
storming the castle, hanging the defenders and flaying Pierre Basile,
the crossbowman who had shot the king, despite Richard's last act
pardoning him.
Mercadier then entered the service of Eleanor of Aquitaine, and
ravaged Gascony and the city of Angers. On Easter Monday, 10 April
1200, he was assassinated while on a visit to Bordeaux to pay his
respects to Eleanor of Aquitaine, who was bringing from Spain
Blanche of Castile. His murder was at the hands of six men-at-arms
employed by Brandin, a rival mercenary captain in the service of
John.
One of the bridges of the Chateau-Gaillard is named for him.
The Death of Richard the Lionheart
Now 'CHASLUC/ MAKES sense. Ic is 'Chalus-Chabrol', and that is
where Huntingdon and his companions must have hidden the True
Cross. They could not go on to turbulent Normandy with the cross

because Philip was closing in on Rouen. But by 1199 things are

different and Mercadier and his routiers have pacified and laid waste
to large swathes of the south, and Richard is ready to reclaim his
treasure.
Tfje story of Richards siege of Cbdlus-Chabrol was told by Richards
almoner. Abbot Milo, who was present, to Abbot Ralph de
Coggeshall, who in turn wrote:
During Lent Richard took advantage of the opportunity of peace with
King Philip to lead an army of his own against the Viscount of
Limoges. Moreover, there are some people who say that a treasure of
incalculablevaluewas foundon the Viscounts land. Tl)e Kingordered
him to hand it over; and when the Viscount refused, the King s anger
wasfiirther aroused. Tlyen he devastated the Viscounts land with fire
and sword as though he did not know that arms should be laid aside
during Lent. At last he came to Chains- Chabrol.
Yes, at last he came to Chdlus-Chabrol - to reclaim his treasure. The
castle was occupied by only thirty-eight men and women.
While his sappers undermined the castle walls, Richards bowmen
fired at anyone who appeared above the parapet. It wasn't a big
castle and surrender before the walls collapsed was increasingly
likely. Surrendering early might lead to clemency, but holding out to
the end would certainly lead to disaster. The acrimony between Philip
and Richard had seen an increasing number of atrocities against
prisoners, and these included castration and blinding
As darkness was falling on 26March upp, Richard left his red tent,
wearing no armour except for a helmet. A rectangular shield held in
front of him by four men in armour was all he had for protection.
Richard carried a crossbow, a weapon he loved, hoping for a little
target practice. But there was only one possible target, also equipped
with a crossbow; high on the parapet. His name was Pierre Basile.
He was taking the occasional potshot at the besiegers below, and
using a
frying pan as a shkld. Use lone defender was providing light entertainment; the besiegers particularly appreciated the frying pan as a
comic prop in this comedy of a siege.
Pierre Basile aimed at Richard the Lionheart. Richard applauded and
then -just too late - ducked behind the shield. Tin bolt struck him in

the left shoulder. The reports say that he made light of it and walked
back to his tent calmly so as not to cause alarm, although it is bard to
see how, with an arrow protruding from his shoulder, he could not
have caused consternation. Tlje bolts on these crossbows were shaped
like an arrow, or like a ragged artichoke. Pierre Basile
may have bad the bigger, defensive crossbow, which was much
heavier. But it seems unlikely that one of these struck Richard. If it
had, he would not have been able to walk away; it would have shattered his whole shoulder.
Back in his tent Richard tried to pull the bolt out by the wooden shaft;
the shaft came away, leaving the iron (or lead) bolt deeply embedded.
Mercadier summoned his own doctor to the King. By torchlight - it
was now late into the night - the surgeon removed the bolt with great
difficulty. One report says that Richard had become
very fat; whether his obesity or inept surgery was to blame, the result
was great trauma to the tissues. Almost inevitably septicaemia or
gangrene set in. Richard knew that he would die. He sent a message
to his beloved mother, askingherto come to his bedside. He wrote
immediately to William the Marshal and to Hubert Walter. He ordered
William to take command of the castle and the treasury of Rouen.
Rouen and much of Normandy would again be vulnerable once Philip
heard of his death. There is a story that he ordered up some local
women to pleasure him, perhaps on the widely held principle that sex
was a defence against death. William the Breton describes him as
indulging in 'thejoys of Venus'.
Eleanor arrived from Roncevaux, near Chinon, where she had been
slaying for some lime; there is no record of what was said, but they
would undoubtedly have discussed saving the Angevin empire and
what to do with Richards heir, his treacherous brother John, who was
clearly not up to the job of conserving Richard's territories. He
probably left instructions for Hubert Walter to work with him. And
Eleanor was to play an important role.
Richard allowed only four of his most trusted companions to enter his
tent; he knew that news of his imminent death would embolden his
enemies and that all he had achieved since his release would be
undone. His reputation had always been his most potent weapon. It is
not difficult to imagine his distress in those last days.

He asked for Pierre Basile to be brought before him.

'What have I done to you that you should kill met' Richard asked.
'You killed my father and two brothers and you intended to kill me.
Take what vengeance you will. So long as you die, I shall willingly
suffer any torments you may devise.'
Richard, perhaps out of respect for his mother and her civil and
gracious principles, pardoned Basile and ordered him released,
although all thirty-eight defenders of the castle were hanged. As night
fell on the 6th of April, Richard confessed his sins to his almoner, Mtlo,
and died. Milo closed his eyes.
Mercadier did not release Easile as ordered, but had him flayed alive
as soon as Richard was dead.
Richards body was divided: his brain and entrails were buried at
Charroux, on the border of his beloved Poitou, and his heart was
buried in the cathedral of Rouen not far from his brother. The
remaining parts were buried at his father s feet in Fontevraud Abbey,
along with the regalia and crown he had worn at Winchester. All this
was according to his instructions. There is a later effigy of Richard
lying next to his mother in Fontevraud. Eleanor is holding, and
looking intently at, an open book. This could be a reminder of her
lively intellect, or an indication of piety. Richards neglected wife who,
like my aunt, had faded from the official narrative, was buried some
years later in a Cistercian abbey near Le Mans, forgotten and erased,
having served her
purpose as part of a strategic deal. The feet of her effigy are resting
on a very small lion. On her head is a queen's crown, although she
never set foot in England.
Richards death was a joy to some and an unbearable sorrow to
others. He was dead after twenty-five years of relentless warfare. It
was said of him that he sought victory rather than conquest. He was
addicted to war and danger. There are soldiers and foreign correspondents who become adrenalin junkies. Maybe Richard was one of
these people who are easily depressed and bored when they are
thrown back into domestic life. But Richard was widely admired for
his contempt for danger and his generosity of spirit. These two
qualities came to be seen as English virtues, despite the fact that

Richard spent so little of his life in England itself, where, he said, it

was cold and it rained all the time.
Rumours immediately sprang up to explain bis death, and what be
was doing in Cbdlus besieging this insignificant castle. There was
talk of a Gallo-Roman treasure. Around Europe the nexus of his death
changed at a stroke the balance of power. John was soon to lose
almost
everything Richard had held. The contrast with his brother caused
some to wonder why God had cut short his life:
Oh death, if heaven allow it,
I chide even God.
God why did you fail?
If you recall he defended your Jaffa
Against many thousands;
Acre too he restored to you ...
Legends sprang up. One German legend - 'Richard Lowenherz'-has
him locked in a room with a lion while in captivity. Richard kills the
lion by slicking his hand down Us throat and ripping out its heart. It
was believed that a lion would not kill a true king. This legend had
wide currency, and nearly two hundred years later, Shakespeare knew
it well enough to use it in King John:
Lady Falconbridge to her son, Philip Falconbridge:
King Richard Coeur-de-Lion was thy father By long and vehement
suit was I seduced To make room for him in my husbands bed. Heaven
lay not my transgression to my charge! Vfou art the issue of my dear
offence, Which was so strongly urg'd, past my defence.
Philip Falconbridge:
Now, by this light, were I to get again, Madam, I would not wish a
better father.
I think of the Globe and Richard III and Emily with her earnest nose,
and her sexual fervour. I try to think clearly of Noor too, but
Death of Attila
Like Attila, Joffrey may be chocking on his pie or succumbing to
poison, possibly in his wine. HBO

Drunk and staggering, a bloody death from esophageal cancer, poison,

murder how Attila the Hun died is a 1500-year old murder mystery
and may be the historical basis of Joffrey Baratheons murder
despite George RR Martins fishy story about it being based on Prince
Eustaces death. This article looks at Attilas death, especially in light
of Dr. Michael Babcocks remarkable book, The Night Attila Died,
and shows the similarities to Joffreys death.
According to various legends and historians, the night Attila died, the
Hunnic king was thrilled with his radiantly beautiful new blonde
bride, Ildico, and celebrated enthusiastically. This wasnt because
Attila was deeply in love with Ildico they had probably only just
met nor was it because Attila was excited to be married he had
many wives.
Attilas marriage feast wasnt a wild Dothraki wedding like you might
imagine rather it was likely steeped in layers of formal etiquette. At
a previous Hunnic banquet, Roman historian Priscus witnessed the
elaborate customs. The Huns formally toasted each guest individually.
The guest could not be seated until the king sipped his wine (or drank
the cup) and passed it back to his cupbearer.1
Reputedly, Attila guzzled wine until he was completely smashed. The
stocky Hun then ripped off Ildicos clothes, carried her up to his
bedchamber, locked the door, and ravaged her.
Groggy from the wine, Attila passed out and choked to death on his
own blood. When Attilas attendants found him the next morning
with a weeping Ildico shaking in a corner of the chamber it looked
like Attila suffered a massive nosebleed.
Like Attila, Joffrey suffers a nosebleed when he dies and dies
choking. HBO
Traditional Perspectives
Over the centuries, there have been many theories about how Attila
died. The chroniclers who recorded his death were not actually
witnesses to it. According to some of these theories

Attila died from a nosebleed. He was so drunk he essentially passed

out and choked on his own blood. (Alternatively, Attila died from an
esophageal cancer or from chronic alcoholism (which caused an
esophageal hemorrhage).)
Flaw: As Michael Babcock points out, the chronicler Priscus noted
that Attila was not known to drink to excess. When he witnessed the
austere king at a banquet, he sipped his wine from a wooden mug.
From Priscus description, the mirthless Attila didnt have the
swinging from the rafters personality type. Attila was the epitome
of icy steel and reserve. He was too much of a control freak and
possibly too vulnerable to get so intoxicated he passed out.
Ildico killed Attila
Flaw: It would have been very daring for a young girl to poison her
fierce warlord husband. Still, if her family threatened her enough, it is
possible she might have agreed to poison him.
Bledas widow poisoned Attila
Flaw: Bledas widow wasnt at the wedding feast.
Attila was killed to avenge his brothers death this may be true.
What Actually May Have Happened
Exhausted and desperate to stop the gold from draining out of their
treasuring, the Eastern and Western Romans may have conspired with
two of Attilas inner circle to assassinate him. These two officials,
Edecon and Orestes, may have killed Attila to avenge the death of
their original leader, Bleda. Attila probably murdered his brother
Bleda.
attila-joffrey
Attila
Jordanes notes that Attila died by the balance of justice as a hideous
consequence of his action likely the murder of his own brother2 .
When the conspirators struck, Attila was already vulnerable. He had
recently suffered major military losses in Italy and Gaul, and
presumably his followers were dissatisfied.3 In fact, he may have

10

married the (likely) Ostrogoth princess Ildico to appease his

Ostrogoth followers and prevent them from abandoning him.
(Incidentally, her appearance and nationality are unrecorded she is
only described as beautiful.)
The Romans, of course, had wanted Attila dead for years. They were
bleeding cash, Attila had repeatedly humiliated them and slaughtered
scores of people. However, Attila was heavily guarded. Gaining
physical access to him was a problem.
Back in 449, the Byzantine eunuch and chief minister Chrysaphius
bribed Attilas lieutenant Edecon to cooperate with an assassination
attempt; it failed.
Solidus_Marcian_RIC_0509
Coin with Marcians image.
After the Byzantine emperor Theodosius II died, his successor
Marcian allied with the Western Roman general, Aetius, to try again
to assassinate Attila. Aetius lived at the Hunnic court in his teens and
had a cordial relationship with the Barbarian king. In fact, Attila had
even sent Bledas favorite dwarf, Zerko, as a gift to Aetius after
Bledas death. But, after Attilas savage rampage through Gaul, he
crossed a line in the sand. Aetius relationship with Attila was over,
and he wanted him dead.
Aetius used his connection to Orestes to draw him into the
conspiracy. Aetius may have provided Orestes, as a Roman secretary,
to Attila.4
Orestes and Edecon were essential parts of the plan. As part of Attilas
inner circle, they could easily have bribed or commanded Attilas
cupbearers to sneak a few drops of poison into his wine.
Similarities to Joffreys Death
George RR Martin has said that Joffreys death was based on the
convenient death of a medieval prince. I based it a little on the death

11

of Eustace, the son of King Stephen of England There are some

small similarities between Prince Eustace and Prince Joffreys deaths.
It seems possible that Martin is neglecting to mention that he may
have used Attilas death as a model. There are far more similarities
between Attila and Joffreys deaths than there are between Attila and
Eustaces death.
Another issue is this quotation from George RR Martin:
Because by removing Eustace, it brought about a peace that ended
the English civil war. Eustaces death was accepted [as accidental],
and I think thats what the murderers here were hoping for the
whole realm will see Joffrey choke to death on a piece of pie or
something ((See http://insidetv.ew.com/2014/04/13/george-r-r-martinwhy-joffrey-killed/ )) .
Joffreys death does not end the civil war and there is no reason the
murderers should assume that it would. The Lannisters still have
Tommen as an heir. As Jaime, I believe it was, recently noted, the war
is not over: Stannis is still alive.
Olenna Tyrell is not motivated to end the war she just doesnt want
her granddaughter married to a sociopath. And the climber Petyr
Baelish could care less about the war he is only motivated to help
the Tyrells.
olenna
Olenna Tyrell (Dianna Rigg) HBO
Does this mean that the conclusions of the careful reader are
incorrect? Assuming the murderer misguidedly thought the war could
be ended by killing Joffrey, who would be motivated to end a civil
war? Varys?

12

But, if Attilas death is the basis for Joffreys death, why wouldnt
Martin say so? Is it because there are historical spoilers in the story of
Attilas death?
Similarity to Joffreys Death #1: A savage possibly sociopathic leader
who dies at a wedding
Neither Joffrey nor Attila had any regard for human life. Both died at
their own politically arranged weddings.
purple-wedding
Joffrey (Jack Gleeson) and Margaery (Natalie Dormer) marry and
cement the Lannister bond with the house they need to win the war.
HBO
Similarity to Joffreys Death #2: Natural Causes or Murder?
Throughout the centuries, a debate has raged about the cause of
Attilas death. Did he die from natural causes, or was he murdered?
Like Joffrey, Attila appeared to choke, he may have suffered some
type of nose bleed or hemorrhage, or he may have been poisoned
possibly by his cupbearer.

joffrey-pie
Joffrey (Jack Gleeson) right before he chokes and dies. HBO.
Although the Tyrells and Peter Baelish believe they murdered Joffrey,
this doesnt necessarily mean they succeeded.
Similarity to Joffreys Death #3: Joffrey and Attila were allegedly
drunk
According to legend, Attila got extremely drunk at his wedding and
then died. Likewsie, Joffrey got extremely drunk at his wedding. As
Tyrion notes in the books, My nephew is drunker than I am5 .

13

Similarity to Joffreys Death #4: The Wife is a Primary Suspect

In some legends, Ildico or a wife of Attilas named Gudrun, killed
him. Until Olennas announcement, many people believed that
Margaery killed Joffrey. Avoiding a wedding night with Joffrey would
be ample motive.
Similarity to Joffreys Death #5: Attila was Probably Killed Due to a
Conspiracy
At this stage, we believe that Joffrey died as the result of a conspiracy
between Olenna Tyrell and Petyr Baelish a conspiracy that crossed
political lines. Still, George RR Martin has all but admitted he is
leading us down the garden path in his Rolling Stone interview:
In the books and I make no promises, because I have two more
books to write, and I may have more surprises to reveal the
conclusion that the careful reader draws is that Joffrey was killed by
the Queen of Thorns, using poison from Sansas hairnet
There is no reason that there couldnt have been multiple attempts, or
even multiple conspiracies, to murder Joffrey at his wedding.
Similarity to Joffreys Death #6: A member of the Joffreys own party
betrayed Joffrey
250px-Littlefingerheadshotpromo
HBO.
The Lannisters gave Petyr Baelish position, power, a castle. Despite
his apparent loyalty to the Lannisters, he betrayed them to forge a new
alliance with a party he felt was more stable. Perhaps, Orestes felt that
an alliance with the Romans was more stable than an alliance with the
merciless Attila.
Similarity to Joffreys Death #7: Protecting a dwarf may be a clue

14

In Michael Babcocks book, The Night Attila died, one of the key
clues he uncovers which reveals Edecon was motivated by revenge
is Edecons desire to protect his former masters favorite, the dwarf
Zerko.
Bleda adored his Moorish dwarf Zerko, and brought him everywhere
almost like a pet or Austin Powers and his mini-me. Bleda even had a
small suit of armor made for Zerko, so he could go on the battlefield
with him, make the troops laugh at his cuteness, and provide stress
relief.6 Despite the threat of crucifixion for deserters, Zerko hated this
indignity so much he ran away.
dwarfs-wedding-joffrey
The dwarf actors at Joffreys wedding directly insulted Tyrion and
showed Joffreys aggression towards his uncle. HBO.
Nonetheless, Bleda laughed his guts out when he saw Zerko brought
back in chains and forgave him especially after Zerko asked for a
wife, which Bleda found even more hilarious. In a curious parallel
with Game of Thrones, Zerko was given a noblewoman in the queens
retinue who had fallen out of favor.7
joffrey-tyrion-wed-sansa
The big picture here? As a noblewoman out of favor with the queen
and her family, Sansa (Sophie Turner) is married off to a dwarf.
HBO
Later, after Bleda died and Attila sent Zerko away, Edecon went to
extensive lengths to bring Zerko back to court and try to reunite him
with his wife. Historian Michael Babcock concludes that this was
done because Edecon felt obliged to protect his late masters beloved
favorite.
Is it possible that Joffrey had once again resumed his quest to kill
Tyrion? Perhaps, Tommen or somebody else was protecting Tyrion by
poisoning Joffrey at the Purple Wedding?

15

The conventional account, from Priscus, says that at a feast

celebrating his latest marriage to the beautiful and young Ildico (if
uncorrupted, the name suggests a Gothic origin) he suffered a severe
nosebleed and choked to death in a stupor. An alternative theory is
that he succumbed to internal bleeding after heavy drinking or a
condition called esophageal varices, where dilated veins in the lower
part of the esophagus rupture leading to death by hemorrhage.
Another account of his death, first recorded 80 years after the events
by the Roman chronicler Count Marcellinus, reports that "Attila, King
of the Huns and ravager of the provinces of Europe, was pierced by
the hand and blade of his wife." The Volsunga saga and the Poetic
Edda also claim that King Atli (Attila) died at the hands of his wife,
Gudrun. Most scholars reject these accounts as no more than hearsay,
preferring instead the account given by Attila's contemporary Priscus.
Priscus' version, however, has recently come under renewed scrutiny
by Michael A. Babcock. Based on detailed philological analysis,
Babcock concludes that the account of natural death, given by
Priscus, was an ecclesiastical "cover story" and that Emperor Marcian
(who ruled the Eastern Roman Empire from 450-457) was the
political force behind Attila's death. ...
Then they celebrated a strava (lamentation) over his burial place with
great feasting. Legend says that he was laid to rest in a triple coffin
made of gold, silver, and iron, along with some of the spoils of his
conquests. His men diverted a section of the river, buried the coffin
under the riverbed, and then were killed to keep the exact location a
secret."
Attilas death
The following year, after a great feast, Attila was found dead on his
wedding night. His bride was Ildico, an apparently younger and quite
beautiful woman, she was one of several wives Attila had at the same
time.
Whether the bride killed Attila or whether he died of natural causes is
a matter of debate. The sixth-century writer Jordanes, who used

16

Priscus as a source, said that he died, supposedly naturally, of a

hemorrhage of blood after a heavy feast. Whether this is accurate is a
mystery.
He had given himself up to excessive joy at his wedding, and as he
lay on his back, heavy with wine and sleep, a rush of superfluous
blood, which would ordinarily have flowed from his nose, streamed in
deadly course down his throat and killed him, since it was hindered in
the usual passages, wrote Jordanes (translation by Charles Mierow,
through University of Calgary website). Thus did drunkenness put a
disgraceful end to a king renowned in war.
Attila was buried in a triple coffin of gold, silver and iron, and the
people who prepared his tomb were supposedly killed so that its
location would remain unknown. Indeed, to this day the tomb of Attila
is still lost. It may have been looted at some point in antiquity, in
which case it may never be found.
After his death his empire fell apart, his sons fighting among each
other, and the western half of the Roman Empire would also fall in a
few decades. Part of the prophecy that Attila dreaded, that his
kingdom would collapse, had come true.
Owen Jarus
- See more at: http://www.livescience.com/44417-attila-thehun.html#sthash.AsAJlKH0.dpuf

In the 5th century, the power of the Pope was not what it was in later
centuries. But as Attila and his Huns were vanquishing city after city,
the people of Rome - and the pope - were worried.
Contemporary accounts tell us that Leo I, then Pope, traveled north to
meet with Attila:

17

The old man of harmless simplicity, venerable in his gray hair and his
majestic garb, ready of his own will to give himself entirely for the
defense of his flock, went forth to meet the tyrant who was destroying
all things.
He met Attila, it is said, in the neighborhood of the river Mincio, and
he spoke to the grim monarch, saying "The senate and the people of
Rome, once conquerors of the world, now indeed vanquished, come
before thee as suppliants. We pray for mercy and deliverance. O
Attila, thou king of kings, thou couldst have no greater glory than to
see suppliant at thy feet this people before whom once all peoples and
kings lay suppliant. Thou hast subdued, O Attila, the whole circle of
the lands which it was granted to the Romans, victors over all
peoples, to conquer. Now we pray that thou, who hast conquered
others, shouldst conquer thyself. The people have felt thy scourge;
now as suppliants they would feel thy mercy."
Raphaels magnificent fresco (which actually depicts Pope Leo X)
and Algardis stunning sculpture (located at the Vaticans St. Peters
Basilica), portray the historic meeting.
For whatever reason (there are several hypotheses including a famine,
the prior year, which may have impeded the Huns ability to obtain
supplies), Attila turned away from Rome.
People believed that Leo was the reason Attila backed down.
Thereafter referred to as Leo the Great, the pontiff had accomplished
not just a victory for Rome but also for the Church. In future years, as
Romes secular power continued to fade, the power of the Roman
Church, and that of the Pope, substantially increased.
The Huns returned home. Attila reportedly joked that he knew how to
conquer men, but the Lion (Pope Leo) and the Wolf (Saint Lupus from Troyes) were too strong for him.
Attilas next plan of conquest was the Eastern Roman Empire. He
never had the chance to actualize that goal, however. Constantinople

18

would remain unconquered for a thousand years, but Attilas life

would soon be over.
Although he already had several wives, Attila took another after his
return from Italy. Celebrating the event, sometime during the early
months of 453, he drank heavily. He died on his wedding night. Most
historians say he died of a nosebleed, perhaps from a burst artery.
His warriors were stunned by his unexpected death. According to
Jordanes, they cut off their hair and slashed themselves with their
swords so that
the greatest of all warriors should be mourned with no feminine
lamentations and with no tears, but with the blood of men.
They buried him in a triple coffin - of gold, silver, and iron - along
with spoils of his conquests. To insure no one learned of his final
resting place, his warriors killed the funeral party.
Another very distinct possibility is that Attila, from historical
accounts a heavy drinker, died of a condition called "esophageal
varices." (It is the number one cause of death for chronic drinking
today.) Victims of this condition usually drown in their own blood,
unless they quickly get a blood transfusion. In Attilas day, of course,
transfusions were not an option.
Attila had ruled just eight years.
After his death, none of his squabbling sons could effectively stand in
their fathers shoes. The once-mighty Empire of the Huns fell apart,
and the Hunnic warriors - all except Attila - faded into history.
The mighty warlord Attila, known as Attila the Hun or the Scourge of
God, ruled a vast territory that stretched from the Ural River in the
east to the Rhine River in the west, and from the Danube River in the
south to the Baltic Sea in the north.
After invading Italy in 452, Attila planned to strike at Constantinople,
which had ceased paying tribute to him while he was occupied in the

19

west. However, Attilas plans were stopped by his untimely death in

early 453.
According to his contemporary, the Roman historian Priscus, Attila
died during the night when he was celebrating his marriage to the
Gothic woman Ildico, his sixth wife. Namely, the warlord had
allegedly gotten so drunk he fell into a stupor, when his nose started
bleeding. Due to his physical state, this led to him choking on his own
blood during the night.
Yet there are alternative theories about his death. For example, one
posits Attila actually died of internal bleeding after heavy drinking.
Namely, chronic drinking can lead to acid reflux disease, which can
cause ruptures in the esophagus.
Another account, penned some 80 years later by the Roman historian
Marcellinus Comes, claims Attila was murdered by his wife. This
account is repeated in some Norse sagas, where his wife is named
Gudrun.
Other theories are that he may have been poisoned by his own
followers to avenge his brother Bleda, whom Attila probably
murdered. Some modern historians also claim it may have been a
Roman plot.
A great lamentation ceremony was held after Attilas death. According
to legend, he was laid to rest in a coffin made of gold, silver, and iron,
and some of the treasures he had plundered were interred with him.
The men who buried him were allegedly killed to keep the location
secret.

Attila the Hun

Definition
by Joshua J. Mark
published on 25 September 2014 Attila the Hun (Zsolt Varga - Kazi)

20

Attila the Hun (reigned 434-453 CE) was the leader of the nomadic
people known as the Huns and ruler of the Hunnic Empire, which he
established. His name means "Little Father" and, according to some
historians, may not have been his birth name but "a term of affection
and respect conferred on his accession" (Man, 159). This name was
synonymous with terror among his enemies and the general populace
of the territories that his armies swept through. Attila's incursions into
the regions of Germania drove the populations across the borders of
the Western Roman Empire and contributed to its decline in the late
5th century CE. The influx of the Visigoths, in particular, and their
later revolt against Rome, is considered a significant contributor to
Rome's fall. The Visigoth victory over the Romans at the Battle of
Adrianople in 378 CE was an event the Roman military never fully
recovered from. Further, that victory encouraged the Huns to join the
Visigoths (their former adversaries) in plundering Roman territories.
The apparent weakness of Rome encouraged Attila, once he became
leader of the Huns, to make and break treaties (such as the Treaty of
Margus in 439 CE) without fear of consequences, and his wide-scale
destruction of Roman cities and towns met with little or no resistance
for the most part, making it clear that the Roman army was no longer
the kind of invincible fighting force it once had been.
IN ITALY, AS IN GAUL, ATTILA SPREAD A WIDE SWATH OF
DESTRUCTION, SO COMPLETELY SACKING THE CITY OF
AQUILEIA THAT NOT ONLY WOULD IT NEVER RISE AGAIN,
BUT NO ONE EVEN KNEW WHERE IT HAD STOOD.
Attila's ability to command a vast army of warriors (often comprised
of different tribes such as the Alans, Alemanni, and Ostrogoths) was
also in contrast to Roman generals of his time, who had difficulty
keeping their non-Roman contingents under control (most clearly
seen in the Roman general Litorius' campaign against the Goths in
439 CE, in which he could not stop his Hun allies from raiding the
regions they passed through). Attila was a brilliant horseman and
military leader, possessed a commanding presence, and held his
empire together through the strength of his individual personality. He
not only made the Huns the most effective fighting force of the time,
but he also built a vast empire from virtually nothing in less than ten

21

years. At its height, this empire stretched from central Asia across to
modern-day France and down through the Danube Valley. After he
died in 453 CE, his sons tried to hold his empire together but failed,
and it broke apart by 469 CE.
EARLY LIFE & RISE TO POWER
Attila's date and place of birth is unknown. The historian Peter
Heather writes:
Our ignorance of the Huns is astounding. It is not even clear what
language they spoke. Most of the linguistic evidence we have comes
in the form of personal names - Hunnic rulers and their henchmen from the time of Attila. But by then, Germanic had become the lingua
franca of the Hunnic Empire and many of the recorded names are
either certainly or probably Germanic. Iranian, Turkish, and FinnUgrian (like the later Magyars) have all had their proponents [for the
language of the Huns], but the truth is that we do not know what
language the Huns spoke and probably never will. The direct evidence
we have for the motivations and forms of Hunnic migration is equally
limited. According to [the ancient writer] Ammianus, there was
nothing to explain `The origin and seedbed of all evils: the people of
the Huns who dwell beyond the Sea of Azov near the frozen ocean,
and are quite abnormally savage.' They were just so fierce that it was
natural for them to go around hitting people. Similar images of
Hunnic ferocity are found in other sources (209).
Although in the present day, his mother's name is sometimes given as
Hungysung Vladdysurf, her name is actually not known, and this
name is considered a recent fabrication. His father's name was
Mundzuk, and his uncle, Rugila (also known as Rua and Ruga), was
king of the Huns. As a young man, Attila, and his older brother Bleda
(also known as Buda), were taught archery, how to ride and care for
horses, and how to fight. They were also taught Latin and Gothic to
enable them to do business with the Romans and Goths. Historians
are divided on how much can be said with certainty regarding Attila's
early years, however, and some (such as John Man) claim that nothing

22

is known of his early life, not even his birth name, and nothing should
be inferred based on his later accomplishments.
Whether Rugila had sons to succeed him is not known, and Mundzuk
seems to have died early in the boys' lives, so it appears that either
Bleda or Attila would be Rugila's heir and succeed him as king;
therefore, their education and instruction in warfare would have
prepared them for the responsibilities of leadership (although some
historians, such as Christopher Kelly, suggest that Attila and Bleda
may have assassinated Rugila's sons on campaign to assume power
and, again, Man claims no such assumptions should be made). Both
boys are thought to have been present at Hun war councils and
negotiations from an early age. Even before Attila became king, the
Huns were a formidable fighting force, although they would become
more so later under his rule. They were expert horsemen whose
steeds, according to ancient reports, would actually fight for them in
battle with teeth and hooves. The historian and former US Army Lt.
Col. Michael Lee Lanning describes the Hun army thusly:
Hun soldiers dressed in layers of heavy leather greased with liberal
applications of animal fat, making their battle dress both supple and
rain resistant. Leather-covered, steel-lined helmets and chain mail
around their necks and shoulders further protected the Hun
cavalrymen from arrows and sword strikes. The Hun warriors wore
soft leather boots that were excellent for riding but fairly useless for
foot travel. This suited the soldiers, for they were much more
comfortable in the saddle than on the ground (62).
When Rugila died on campaign against Constantinople in 433 CE,
leadership passed to Attila and Bleda. Lanning writes, "Attila
inherited an army that had waged war against its neighbors,
particularly the Eastern Roman Empire, for hundreds of years. Ruga's
operations against the Romans had been so successful that Rome paid
the Huns an annual tribute to maintain the peace" (61). The brothers
ruled jointly - each in control of their own regions and populace - and,
as Lanning notes, frequently dealt with the Eastern Roman Empire,

23

who formerly had paid the Huns as mercenaries to take care of the
other tribes harassing Rome's boundaries, but now found they were
paying to keep the Huns from invading.
Attila the Hun
Attila the Hun
Attila and Bleda together brokered the Treaty of Margus with Rome
in 439 CE. This treaty continued the precedent of Rome paying off the
Huns in return for peace, which would be a more or less constant
stipulation in Roman-Hun relations until Attila's death. An agreement
between the Huns and the Romans had already been brokered in 435
CE by the Roman general Flavius Aetius (391-454 CE), who had
lived among the Huns as a hostage in his youth, spoke their language,
and employed them to his advantage in his various power struggles in
the empire. The Treaty of Margus expanded on Aetius' treaty: the
Romans promised to return all Hun refugees who had fled into Roman
territories, would not enter into pacts or treaties with enemies of the
Huns, would establish fair trading rights and, of course, would "make
an annual payment of seven hundred pounds of gold directly to Attila
and Bleda" (Kelly, 118). For their part, the Huns promised not to
attack Rome, not to enter into pacts or treaties with Rome's enemies,
and to defend the Danube frontier and the provinces of the empire.
The treaty concluded, the Romans were able to withdraw their troops
from the Danube region and send them against the Vandals who were
threatening Rome's provinces in Sicily and North Africa. The Huns
turned their attention east after the Margus Treaty and warred against
the Sassanid Empire but were repelled and driven back toward the
Great Hungarian Plain, which was their home base. With the Roman
troops who once guarded the border now deployed to Sicily, the Huns
saw an opportunity for easy plunder. Kelly writes, "As soon as Attila
and Bleda received reliable intelligence that the fleet had left for
Sicily, they opened their Danube offensive" (122). They claimed the
Romans had violated the Margus treaty by not sending back all the
Hun refugees in Roman territory and, further, claimed that a Roman
bishop had made a secret trip into Hun territory to desecrate Hun

24

graves and steal valuable grave goods - and they wanted this bishop
turned over to them.
Theodosius sent his general Flavius Aspar to try to negotiate with
Attila and Bleda, but it was no use. Attila showed Aspar recently
disturbed graves, but there was no way of telling whose graves they
were, who had disturbed them, or what may have been taken from
them. With no proof of a crime, Aspar refused to turn the bishop over
to the Huns and, further, claimed he had no knowledge of Hun
refugees hiding from Attila and Bleda on Roman soil. The Huns
insisted, Aspar could not comply, and negotiations reached a
stalemate. Aspar returned to Constantinople to report these
developments to Theodosius but does not seem to have felt there was
any imminent threat of a Hun invasion. The refugees in question were
Huns who had fled Attila's rule, and who he wanted returned before
they could stir up rebellion against him. As it turned out, there were
still a number of refugees living in Roman territory (who would later
be handed over), and the bishop Attila wanted most likely did rob the
graves and would later betray the city of Margus to the Huns so, as it
happened, it would have been better if Aspar had simply handed him
and the refugees over in the first place.
He did not do so, however, and considering the treaty broken, Attila
mobilized for war. As Aspar headed back toward Constantinople in
the summer of 441 CE, Attila and Bleda drove their armies through
the border regions and sacked the cities of the province of Illyricum,
which were very profitable Roman trade centers. They then further
violated the Treaty of Margus by riding on to that city and destroying
it (with the help of the bishop who opened the gates for them).
Theodosius II (401-450 CE) then declared the treaty broken and
recalled his armies from the provinces to stop the Hun rampage. Attila
and Bleda responded with a full-scale invasion, sacking and
destroying Roman cities all the way to within 20 miles of the Roman
capital of Constantinople. The city of Naissus, birthplace of the
emperor Constantine the Great, was razed and would not be rebuilt
for a century afterwards. The Huns had learned a great deal about
siege warfare from their time serving in the Roman army and expertly

25

put this knowledge to use, literally wiping whole cities, such as

Naissus, off the map. Their offensive was all the more successful
because it was completely unexpected. Theodosius II had been so
confident that the Huns would keep the treaty that he refused to listen
to any council that suggested otherwise. Lanning comments on this,
writing:
Attila and his brother valued agreements little and peace even less.
Immediately upon assuming the throne, they resumed the Hun
offensive against Rome and anyone else who stood in their way. Over
the next ten years, the Huns invaded territory which today
encompasses Hungary, Greece, Spain, and Italy. Attila sent captured
riches back to his homeland and drafted soldiers into his own army
while often burning the overrun towns and killing their civilian
occupants. Warfare proved lucrative for the Huns but wealth
apparently was not their only objective. Attila and his army seemed
genuinely to enjoy warfare, the rigors and rewards of military life
were more appealing to them than farming or attending livestock (61).
Theodosius II, realizing he was defeated but unwilling to admit total
defeat, asked for terms; the sum Rome now had to pay to keep the
Huns from further destruction was more than tripled. The historian
Will Durant writes, "Theodosius II of the Eastern Empire and
Valentinan III of the Western, both paid him tribute as a bribe to
peace, disguising it among their peoples as payments for services
rendered by a client king" (39). After their Danube Offensive, Attila
and Bleda led their troops back home to the Great Hungarian Plain,
where Bleda then vanishes from the historical record. Kelly cites "the
most reliable Roman account", Priscus, who writes that three years
after the offensive, "Bleda, king of the Huns, was assassinated as a
result of the plots of his brother Attila" (129). Other scholars have
suggested that Bleda may have been killed on campaign but, however
he died, in 445 CE, Attila became sole leader of the Huns and the
most powerful military commander in Europe.
ATTILA'S EARLY REIGN & HONORIA'S PROPOSAL

26

The historian Jordanes (6th century CE), who wrote the only ancient
account of the Goths still extant, includes their interactions with the
Huns, describing Attila at length:
He was a man born into the world to shake the nations, the scourge of
all lands, who in some way terrified all mankind by the rumors noised
abroad concerning him. He was haughty in his walk, rolling his eyes
hither and thither, so that the power of his proud spirit appeared in the
movement of his body. He was indeed a lover of war, yet restrained in
action; mighty in counsel, gracious to suppliants, and lenient to those
who were once received under his protection. He was short of stature,
with a broad chest and a large head; his eyes were small, his beard
was thin and sprinkled with gray. He had a flat nose and a swarthy
complexion, revealing his origin (Jordanes, 102).
Although Attila is almost always represented as a vicious warrior on
horseback, slaughtering the multitudes, he was actually a more
complex individual, as the Roman writer Priscus, who actually met
and dined with Attila, presents him. Historian Will Durant (following
the descriptions from ancient accounts like those of Priscus) writes of
Attila:
He differed from the other barbarian conquerors in trusting to cunning
more than to force. He ruled by using the heathen superstitions of his
people to sanctify his majesty; his victories were prepared by the
exaggerated stories of his cruelty which perhaps he had himself
originated; at last even his Christian enemies called him the "scourge
of God" and were so terrified by his cunning that only the Goths could
save them. He could neither read nor write, but this did not detract
from his intelligence. He was not a savage; he had a sense of honor
and justice, and often proved himself more magnanimous than the
Romans. He lived and dressed simply, ate and drank moderately, and
left luxury to his inferiors, who loved to display their gold and silver
utensils, harness, and swords, and the delicate embroidery that
attested the skillful fingers of their wives. Attila had many wives, but
scorned that mixture of monogamy and debauchery which was
popular in some circles of Ravenna and Rome. His palace was a huge

27

loghouse floored and walled with planed planks, but adorned with
elegantly carved or polished wood, and reinforced with carpets and
skins to keep out the cold (39).
Among the "heathen superstitions" Durant notes is the war sword
Attila carried, which he claimed was left for him by the Roman god of
war, Mars. This sword, according to Jordanes, was discovered by
accident:
When a certain shepherd beheld one heifer of his flock limping and
could find no cause for this wound, he anxiously followed the trail of
blood and at length came to a sword it had unwittingly trampled while
nibbling the grass. He dug it up and took it straight to Attila. He
rejoiced at this gift and, being ambitious, thought he had been
appointed ruler of the whole world, and that through the sword of
Mars supremacy in all wars was assured to him (102).
Attila saw Rome as a feeble adversary and so, starting in 446 or 447
CE, he again invaded the region of Moesia (the Balkan area),
destroying over 70 cities, taking survivors as slaves, and sending the
loot back to his stronghold at the city of Buda (possibly Budapest in
present-day Hungary, though this claim has been contested by some
historians). He was considered invincible and, in Durant's words,
"having bled the East to his heart's content, Attila turned to the West
and found an unusual excuse for war" (40). In 450 CE, Valentinian's
sister, Honoria, was seeking to escape an arranged marriage with a
Roman senator and sent a message to Attila, along with her
engagement ring, asking for his help. Although she may never have
intended anything like marriage, Attila chose to interpret her message
and ring as a betrothal and sent back his terms as one half of the
Western Empire for her dowry. Valentinian, when he discovered what
his sister had done, sent messengers to Attila telling him it was all a
mistake, and there was no proposal, no marriage, and no dowry to be
negotiated. Attila asserted that the marriage proposal was legitimate,
that he had accepted and would claim his bride, and mobilized his
army to march on Rome.

28

Empire of Attila the Hun

Empire of Attila the Hun
THE INVASION OF GAUL & BATTLE OF THE CATALUANIAN
PLAINS
In 451 CE he began his conquests with an army of probably about
200,000 men, although sources, such as Jordanes, set the number
higher at half a million. They took Gallia Belgica province (modernday Belgium) easily and moved on to ravage the land. The only time
Attila had been turned back from a conquest was by the Sassanids,
and his reputation for slaughter and invincibility preceded him as he
moved through Gaul. Durant writes, "All Gaul was terrified; here was
no civilized warrior like Caesar, no Christian... this was the awful and
hideous Hun, the flagellum dei [Scourge of God], come to punish
Christian and pagan alike for the enormous distance between their
professions and their lives" (40). The reputation of the Huns for
brutality and indiscriminate slaughter was well known and sent the
people of the land fleeing for their lives with whatever they could
carry. The Roman writer Ammianus Marcellinus (330-391 CE) wrote
of the Huns in his History of Rome:
The nation of the Huns surpasses all other barbarians in wildness of
life. And though [the Huns] do just bear the likeness of men (of a very
ugly pattern), they are so little advanced in civilization that they make
no use of fire, nor any kind of relish, in the preparation of their food,
but feed upon the roots which they find in the fields, and the half-raw
flesh of any sort of animal. I say half-raw, because they give it a kind
of cooking by placing it between their own thighs and the backs of
their horses. When attacked, they will sometimes engage in regular
battle. Then, going into the fight in order of columns, they fill the air
with varied and discordant cries. More often, however, they fight in
no regular order of battle, but by being extremely swift and sudden in
their movements, they disperse, and then rapidly come together again
in loose array, spread havoc over vast plains, and flying over the
rampart, they pillage the camp of their enemy almost before he has
become aware of their approach. It must be owned that they are the
most terrible of warriors because they fight at a distance with missile

29

weapons having sharpened bones admirably fastened to the shaft.

When in close combat with swords, they fight without regard to their
own safety, and while their enemy is intent upon parrying the thrust of
the swords, they throw a net over him and so entangle his limbs that
he loses all power of walking or riding (XXXI.ii.1-9).
The Hun army was one enormous cavalry unit that struck their
adversaries quickly, neither asking for, nor offering, any mercy.
Lanning writes:
Relying on mobility and shock effect, Attila rarely committed his
soldiers to close, sustained combat. He preferred to approach his
enemy using the terrain to hide his troops until he was within arrow
range. While one rank fired at high angles to cause the defenders to
raise their shields, another fired directly into the enemy lines. Once
they had inflicted sufficient casualties, the Huns closed in to finish off
the survivors (62).
It is little wonder that no general was especially eager to engage the
Hun forces under Attila. Kelly notes how the Huns "appeared as if
from nowhere and melted away, leaving only destruction behind
them. It was impossible to establish an effective early-warning
system" (38). Attila took Trier and Metz without opposition,
massacred the citizens, and then rode on, destroying everything in his
path. He was finally met in battle by the combined forces of the
Romans under Flavius Aetius, who understood Hun strategy and
tactics, and the Visigoths under Theodoric I (reigned 418-451 CE) on
the Cataluanian Plains. This engagement is known as the Battle of
Cataluanian Fields or the Battle of Chalons and has been described as
one of the bloodiest military conflicts in history and the first time
Attila's forces were halted in an invasion of Europe. Historian Jack
Watkins describes the battle:
The Romans, occupying the high ground, quickly succeeded in
pushing the Huns back in confusion, and Attila had to harangue them
to return to the fight. During fierce hand-to-hand fighting, King
Theodoric of the Visigoths was killed. But rather than discouraging

30

the Visigoths, their king's death enraged them and they fought with
such spirit that the Huns were driven back to their camp as night fell.
For several days the Huns did not move from their encampment, but
their archers succeeded in keeping the Romans at bay. The desertion
of the frustrated Visigoths allowed Attila to withdraw his army from
the battlefield, and with his wagons of booty intact. The Romans did
not pursue him; but his aura of invincibility had been shattered (85).
THE ITALY CAMPAIGN
Although Attila had been stopped in his invasion, he had hardly been
defeated. The Romans claimed the victory, however, and returned to
their homes in the hope that Attila would now harass someone else. In
452 CE, though, he returned to invade Italy and claim the bride who
had promised him her hand in marriage. Here, as in Gaul, he spread a
wide swath of destruction and so completely sacked the city of
Aquileia that not only would it never rise again, but no one even knew
where it had stood. The people of Italy, as the Gauls before them,
were terrified of the Hun invasion but now, unlike the year before,
Aetius did not have an army of sufficient force to stop Attila. Whole
populations fled their cities and villages for safer regions and, in fact,
this was how the city of Venice came to rise from the marshes to
become the "City of Bridges" (among other names), as it is known as
in the present day. In flight from Attila's army, people took refuge on
what solid ground they could find in the watery regions they felt
Attila would bypass. They chose wisely, in that Attila's forces avoided
the lagoons and marched on toward more attractive grounds.
For reasons no one knows, the Huns stopped at the Po River. A famine
had been plaguing Italy for the better part of two years, and quite
possibly Attila had simply run out of supplies. It has also been
suggested that plague had broken out in Attila's army, which forced
him to abandon his plans. Further, there is the suggestion that his men
cautioned him against continuing on to sack Rome. The Gothic
commander Alaric I (reigned 394-410 CE) had sacked Rome in 410
CE and died shortly afterwards; superstition suggested Alaric's death
was a direct result of his assault on such a prestigious city. It is also
possible that some kind of peace was agreed to between Attila and

31

Rome. Valentinian sent Pope Leo I with a delegation to seek terms

from Attila, but the details of that meeting are unknown. All that is
clear is that, following the meeting with Leo I and his delegates, Attila
turned back and retreated to his stronghold in Hungary.
Feast of Attila
Feast of Attila

Death & Legacy

Whether he remembered Honoria and the dowry is unknown (Durant,
and others, claim he threatened to return to Italy for Honoria unless
she was sent to him, but this is not clear from the primary sources),
but he soon took a new, young wife, in 453 CE, named Ildico. Durant
writes, "He celebrated the wedding with an unusual indulgence in
food and drink. On the morrow he was found dead in bed beside his
young wife; he had burst a blood vessel, and the blood in his throat
had choked him to death" (40-41). As with Alexander the Great,
alternative versions of Attila's death have been suggested, but Durant's
version follows that of Priscus, which is the first given and considered
the most reliable. Other versions include assassination by Ildico, a
conspiracy involving the emperor of the East, Marcian (450-457 CE),
who had Attila killed, and accidental death by alcohol poisoning or
esophageal hemorrhage from drinking too much.
The entire army fell into intense grief over the loss of their leader.
Attila's horsemen smeared their faces with blood and rode slowly, in a
steady circle, around the tent which held his body. Kelly describes the
aftermath of Attila's death:
According to the Roman historian Priscus of Panium, they [the men
of the army] had cut their long hair and slashed their cheeks "so that
the greatest of all warriors should be mourned not with tears or the
wailing of women but with the blood of men." Then followed a day of
grief, feasting, and funeral games; a combination of celebration and
lamentation that had a long history in the ancient world. That night,
far beyond the frontiers of the Roman empire, Attila was buried. His

32

body was encased in three coffins; the innermost covered in gold, a

second in silver, and a third in iron. The gold and silver symbolized
the plunder that Attila had seized while the harsh gray iron recalled
his victories in war (6).
According to legend, a river was then diverted, Attila buried in the
river's bed, and the waters then released to flow over it covering the
spot. Those who had taken part in the funeral were killed so that the
burial place might never be revealed. According to Kelly, "these, too,
were honorable deaths", in that they were part of the funeral honors
for the great warrior who had brought his followers so far and
accomplished so much for them.
Following his funeral, his empire was divided among his sons who
fought with each other for the greatest share, squandered their
resources, and allowed the kingdom to fall apart. By 469 CE, only 16
years after Attila's death, the empire was gone. Attila's memory,
however, lives on as one of the greatest military leaders of all time.
He has been depicted since his death as the epitome of a warrior-king,
and recent portrayals follow this traditional image. Dramatic feature
films which reference him, even in passing, present him as a powerful
warrior, and even in the Hollywood comedy Night at the Museum,
from 2006 CE, Attila the Hun is depicted as a formidable force.
Lanning writes:
Attila the Hun was the greatest battle captain of his age, his reputation
striking terror in his enemies who both feared and respected the
Scourge of God. More than fifteen hundred years later, his name
remains synonymous with aggressive cavalry and the warrior ethos
(63).
In March of 2014 it was reported that Attila's tomb had been
discovered in Budapest, Hungary, which is thought to now comprise
part of Attila's capital of Buda. The find generated a great deal of
interest, and one of the researchers was even quoted in reports as
saying, "In fact, this definitely seems to be the resting place of the
almighty Attila, but further analysis needs to be done to confirm it.

33

Further analysis - by others not on the team that allegedly discovered

the tomb - has revealed the claim to be a hoax. Although scholars
have often been skeptical of the story of Attila being buried beneath a
river, there is precedent for this. The Mesopotamian king Gilgamesh
was also said to have been buried beneath a river, the Euphrates River,
and this was long considered a myth. In April of 2003 CE, however, a
German team of archaeologists claimed to have discovered the Tomb
of Gilgamesh precisely where the ancient texts said it was.
Archaeological excavations, conducted through modern technology
involving magnetization in and around the old riverbed of the
Euphrates, revealed garden enclosures, specific buildings, and
structures described in The Epic of Gilgamesh, including the great
kings tomb. According to legend, Gilgamesh was buried at the
bottom of the Euphrates when the waters parted upon his death. Much
closer to Attila's time, Alaric I was said to have been buried beneath
the waters of the Busento River in Italy after his death in 410 CE, the
waters being diverted and then returned to their bed. According to the
ancient sources regarding Attila's funeral, he was also buried beneath
a river that was diverted and then returned to cover the tomb. It would
seem imprudent, considering the precedent of the tomb of Gilgamesh
story and the report of Alaric's burial, to dismiss the stories
surrounding the last resting place of the great warrior Attila the Hun
and to claim he was buried elsewhere. Wherever his tomb is, and what
treasures it contains, remains unknown. The world-wide interest in the
story of his tomb's discovery, however, is a testimony to how great a
hold on people's imaginations Attila still commands. He remains to
this day one of the most interesting and engaging figures from ancient
history, and his name is still associated with the concept of an
unstoppable force.

Pope Leo I Convinces Attila the Hun Not to Sack

Rome
Pope Leo I Convinces Attila the Hun Not to Sack Rome

34

"Invasion of the Barbarians, or the Huns Approaching Rome" by

Ulpiano Checa (1887) (Unless otherwise indicated, all illustrations are
courtesy of Wikipedia)
Todays military-related incident involves the man known to Romans
and historians as the "Scourge of God." He was intent upon the
looting of the preeminent city of western Europe at that time: Rome,
the "Eternal City." Despite a weakened West Roman Empire swiftly
sliding toward its dissolutionAttila retreated before achieving his
main objective. What happened?
Background
In the spring of 450, Attila received an unusual letter. It was from
Justa Grata Honoria, the ambitious and promiscuous half-sister of the
current West Roman emperor Valentinian III. She had plotted to
assassinate her brother and replace him on the imperial throne. Rather
than execute or exile her, Valentinian had tried to shut her up in a
nunnery in Constantinople. After several unsuccessful attempts to
escape, Valentinian decided that the next most likely way to keep his
half-sibling occupied was to marry her off to an elderly Roman
senator, one Bassus Herculanus, who is described as having good
character and a total lack of ambition.
The wedding was probably celebrated in early 450. Wanting to avoid
the oblivion of a loveless marriage, Honoria wrote a letter to Attila,
asking for his assistance. She also sent her engagement ring with the
letter, possibly to show the genuineness of her appeal. Attila, however,
chose to interpret her appeal as a counter-marriage proposal. He
replied to Honoria, saying he would "ride to her rescue." In addition,
Attila asked that he be given half of the West Roman Empire as her
dowry.
Within a year, Attila led a tribal coalition of various non-Roman
peoples across the Rhine River into what is today France. Records of
the period give wildly exaggerated numbers for the Hunnish horde,

35

but it likely was somewhere in the neighborhood of 50,000-60,000

men. [Among the various peoples under his command, Attila
controlled Ostrogoths, Thuringians, Rugians, Franks, Gepids,
Burgundians, and Heruli.] After sacking such cities as Worms, Mainz,
Cologne, Metz, Amiens, and Reims, and threatening Paris and
Orlans, Attila was drawn to the Catalaunian Plains (or Fields) near
the town of Chlons-sur-Marne. On June 20, after fighting during the
afternoon and into the evening, the Roman-led force stopped the
Hunnish invasion and drove them back to their headquarters in central
Europe (modern-day Hungary).
Attila and his followers returned in 452, this time apparently heading
directly for the "Eternal City" itself, Rome. Northern Italy was
thoroughly ravaged and pillaged by the Huns. The city of Aquileia
was besieged and completely destroyed. [Before its destruction,
Aquileia was a center of government (with an imperial residence),
commerce and finance (with a mint), military defense, and
Christianity (with a bishop in residence). Its destruction and Attila's
subsequent unimpeded ravaging of the province of Venetia paved the
way for the rise of Venice, which within a few centuries replaced and
even surpassed it in importance.]
Attila and his army then proceeded to sack many of the cities of the
Po River valley, including Verona, Milan, and Padua. He threatened
Ravenna the capital of the West Roman Empire at that time and
likely considering turning further south to sack Rome itself.
Emperor Valentinian, in an effort to make Attila "just go away," sent a
trio of envoys to the Hunnish camp. They were: Gennadius Avienus, a
former consul; Trigetius, apparently another high official of the
Empire; and Pope Leo I later to receive the cognomen of "the
Great." The three envoys journeyed up the Po River valley to a spot
near Mantua, where the River Minco flowed into the Po. Attilas army
was encamped there, weighing its options. Sometime after the arrival
of the trio of ambassadors, they elicited from Attila a promise to

36

proceed no further into Itally, and the Hunnish hordes began their
withdrawal.
Why Did Attila Suddenly Change His Mind??
There are a number of theories as to the reasons for Attilas sudden
reversal. They include:
The Supreme Army Commander of the West Roman Empire, Flavius
Aetius, was still the one man capable of opposing the Huns. After
defeating the Huns at the Catalaunian Fields the previous year, Aetius
used the military units under his command (probably barbarian
federati cavalry) to harass Attilas scouts and supply train. Attila may
have been skittish about once more facing the man who beat him on
the battlefield.
An army from the East Roman Empire had crossed the Danube River,
and began raiding Hunnic settlements in Hungary, threatening Attilas
supply lines.
Northern Italy had suffered a severe famine the previous year, which
had caused massive privation in Italy. The harvest had not improved
in the year since. Attila would need large supplies of food if his army
was to march on Rome, but the continuing poor harvest did not bode
well.
Some historians speculate that famine and disease had broken out in
the Hunnish army, and that made many of his soldiers unavailable for
further military activities.
There is also conjecture that the three Roman envoys offered Attila a
huge bribe to leave Roman lands. That, however, is not backed up by
any records.
Finally, there isthe divine explanation. Pope Leo is given much
credit (especially by the Catholic Church) for driving away the
heathen Huns. [If you look at the fresco above, you will see floating
above the Pope, Saints Peter and Paul, both brandishing swords
threatening the Hunnic leader, who is riding a black horse at the
center.] No wonder Leo I acquired the sobriquet "the Great."
Or, it may have been a combination of some or all of the above.
[Remember, Rome was not the most prominent city of the shrinking

37

West Roman Empire at that time. The main administrative offices of

the empire had been transferred to the northern Italian city of
Ravenna. Rome was now just a hollow symbol of the fading Empires
glory days.]
Aftermath
Attilas reign as Hunnic leader ended early in the year 453. According
to most historians of the period, he was celebrating his marriage to a
younger woman. One account said he began bleeding from his nose
during the reception, and when he fell into a drunken stupor
apparently drowned in his own blood. Another account said he was
dispatched by his new bride, who was probably of Ostrogothic
heritage. The account which many males probably would believe says
that he was "having his way" with his new wife, and suffered a heart
attack.
Footnote #1: Attilas three sons fought over the succession. However,
in 468 a coalition of Hunnic subject tribes revolted under the
leadership of the Gepids. The Huns were defeated at the battle of
Nedao, and were expelled from western and central Europe, returning
to the area around the Black Sea, which was probably their original
homeland.
Footnote #2: Many people in Hungary and Transylvania (part of
nearby Romania) claim blood heritage with the Huns.
Footnote #3: The "glory that was Rome" had mostly faded by the
mid-fifth century AD and the Empires administration was moved to
the city of Ravenna in northern Italy. Romes population has been
estimated at about 1.2 million people in about AD 175, but began
declining through war, disease, famine, and overcrowding. The citys
population in AD 450 has been estimated at about 200,000 persons.
By the mid sixth century, only about 30,000 people still inhabited the
"Eternal City." Modern-day Rome boasts a population of 2.9 million
people.

38

Footnote #4: Attila the Hun has been fodder for the motion picture
industry. In the 1954 French-Italian movie "Attila," the title role was
played by Anthony Quinn (with Sophia Loren as Honoria). Also in
1954, the film "Sign of the Pagan" had Jack ["Billy Crystal? I crap
bigger than him"] Palance as Attila. Finally, a 2001 British-made
mini-series entitled "Attila" starred Gerard Butler [remember the film
"300"?] in the title role, with Powers Boothe as Aetius.

Leo and Attila[edit]

Despite his defeat at the Battle of Chalons in 451, Attila invaded Italy
in 452, sacking cities such as Aquileia and heading for Rome. He
allegedly demanded that the sister of the reigning Emperor
Valentinian III be sent to him with a dowry. In response, the emperor
sent three envoys to negotiate with Attila: Gennadius Avienus, one of
the consuls of 450, Memmius Aemilius Trygetius, the former urban
prefect, and Leo. Little is known of the specifics of the negotiations,
as a result of which Attila withdrew. Most ancient and medieval
historians celebrated Leo's actions, giving him all the credit for this
successful embassy. According to Prosper of Aquitaine who was alive
at the time of the event, Attila was so impressed by Leo that he
withdrew.[11] Another near-contemporary was the historian Priscus
who records that Attila was dissuaded from attacking Rome by his
own men because they feared he would share the fate of the
Visigothic king Alaric, who died shortly after sacking the city in 410.
[12] Paul the Deacon, in the late 8th century, relates that an
enormously huge man dressed in priestly robes and armed with a
naked sword, visible only to Attila, threatened him and his army with
death during his discourse with Leo, and this prompted Attila to
submit to his request.[13]
More modern historians debate other possible reasons for Attila's
sudden withdrawal. The pope may have offered Attila a large sum of
gold or Attila may have had logistical and strategic concerns: an army
probably laden with booty from plunder; a plague in northern Italy;
food shortages; military actions of the Eastern Emperor Marcianus on
the Danube frontier. Besides, the whereabouts of Atius at that time

39

are unknown, and Attila or his warriors may have felt endangered by
their arch-enemy from the Catalaunian plains.
Writing in the early 20th century, John B. Bury remarked:
The fact of the embassy cannot be doubted. The distinguished
ambassadors visited the Hun's camp near the south shore of Lake
Garda. It is also certain that Attila suddenly retreated. But we are at a
loss to know what considerations were offered him to induce him to
depart. It is unreasonable to suppose that this heathen king would
have cared for the thunders or persuasions of the Church. The
Emperor refused to surrender Honoria, and it is not recorded that
money was paid. A trustworthy chronicle hands down another account
which does not conflict with the fact that an embassy was sent, but
evidently furnishes the true reasons which moved Attila to receive it
favourably. Plague broke out in the barbarian host and their food ran
short, and at the same time troops arrived from the east, sent by
Marcian to the aid of Italy. If his host was suffering from pestilence,
and if troops arrived from the east, we can understand that Attila was
forced to withdraw. But whatever terms were arranged, he did not
pretend that they meant a permanent peace. The question of Honoria
was left unsettled, and he threatened that he would come again and do
worse things in Italy unless she were given up with the due portion of
the Imperial possessions.[14]
Leo's intercession could not prevent the sack of the city by the
Vandals in 455, but murder and arson were repressed by his influence.
Leo did, however, assist in rebuilding the city of Rome; restoring key
places such as Saint Peter's. He died in 461 and, as he wished to be
buried as close as possible to the tomb of St Peter, his body was
placed in a tomb in the portico of Saint Peter's basilica on 10
November of that year and in 688 was moved inside the basilica itself.
[15]