The title of the book transcribes the phonetics extracted from many Chinese spellings in the Chinese annals, in English-lingual literature the Chinese term "Hunnu" is either transcribed in Chinese pinyin Xiongnu or Wade-Giles Hsiung-nu, or English Huns. The Chinese spelling 匈奴 is a preferred name in modern works, and scientists used the wealth of the different spellings for detailed analysis of etymological semantics, historical reconstructions, ethnical and linguistical studies.

The following L. N. Gumilev's historiographical review on the subject of Hunnish language was published in 1960, and the consensus about the Türkic-linguality of the Huns and the Türkic being the lingua franca of the Hunnic confederation did not changed since. Aside from purely linguistic studies, the consensus is based on written and archeological ethnological evidence, and numerous direct statements of the Chinese annals. No prior suggestion gained traction, and post-1960 thesis by E.Pulleyblank in respect to the Ket language did not find a acceptance, with some scholars like A.Vovin keeping pursuing it. The linguistic suggestion that Hunnic was a language that developed into Türkic and Mongolic languages needed to come up with a convincing process of that development, analyzing the sources of differences, and of the historical events that drove that process. Notably, nowhere in his monograph L.Gumilev specifically addresses, in a quotable paragraph, on the once popular topic of the Eastern Huns/Chinese "Hunnu" identification with the Western Huns. In contrast, the whole 2-volume monograph traces historical events and influences that the Huns lived through, and step-by-step notes ethnological transformations and metamorphoses experienced by the Hun people in their 1,000-years history.

The question of language which the Huns spoke has extensive literature, which now mostly lost its value ¹⁵⁵. Siratori was proving that Hunnish words known to us are Türkic and the only Hunnic phrase which reached us is Türkic ¹⁵⁶. Research of Finnic scientists raised a question of the Hunnish language in somewhat another perspective: Castren ¹⁵⁷ and Ramstedt ¹⁵⁸ expressed opinion that Hunnish language was common for ancestors of Türkic and Mongols. Pelliot noted, that it includes elements of even more ancient layer ¹⁵⁹. Ligeti left a question of Hunnish language open, referring to the Hunnish word designating "boots", known to us in the Chinese transcription, which sounds "sagdak" and has no analogies neither in Türkic, nor in Mongolian. The comparison cited by him with a Ket word "segdi" did not satisfy the author himself ¹⁶⁰.

However this word has a direct connection to an Old Russian word "sagaidak", i.e. a quiver with arrows and bow. It was of the Türko-Mongolian origin, and was in use in the 16-17th centuries. Its connection with the Hunnish word "sagdak" is abundantly clear, because Huns stuck arrows in the boots when they did not fit in the quiver ¹⁶¹, as later did the Russians, sticking knifes there. So, the word "sagdak" probably ascends to the same Türko-Mongolian linguistic elements which in the 1st millenium BC were apparently still poorly differentiated; but it is also possible that the commonality of the Hunnish and Mongolian words is an evidence of the cultural exchange between peoples closely connected by the historical fate. Despite of the cited arguments the doubt about Türkic-linguality of the Huns can be regarded as unwarranted, because we have a direct testimony of the written source about the affinity of Hunnish and Tele languages ¹⁶², i.e. of the Uigur, about belonging of which can be no two opinions (“Чи-ди на китайском языке значит: красные северные кочевые. В продолжение великих перемен, последовавших в Китае в последней половине III века пред Р. Х., Красные кочевые вытеснены были в степь, где они уже под народным названием Дили заняли пространство от Ордоса к западу, и говорили хуннуским, т. е. общим монгольским языком с небольшой разницей.”//“Chi di in Chinese means: red northern nomadic. During great changes in China in the latter half of the 3rd century AD, the Red nomads were displaced to the steppe, where already under their folk name Dili ~ Tele they occupied space west from Ordos, and spoke in Hunnic, i.e. common Türkic language with small difference.” Bichurin called Hunnic language Mongolian, but Tele ~ Uigurs spoke Türkic. Vol. 1, Part 2, Sect.5 Hoihu (Uigur)//Weishu Ch. 103). Ligeti himself points out that the doubts in Türkic-linguality of the Huns are based on the analysis of special "culture words" which very frequently turn out to be borrowings, which is not surprising, because the connection of the Huns with their neighbors was lasting and intensive.

Footnotes

155. See: Inostrantsev K.A., Hunnu and Guns, L., 1926.
156. Siratori K., Uber die Sprache der Hiungnu und der Tanghu - Stamme. St. Pb., 1902; Bulletin de l'Academie Imperiale des Sciences de S.-Petersburg, V. Serie, Bd. 17. No 2 (Individual print).
157. Castren M.A., Ethnologische Vorlesungen uber die altaischen Volker. St.-Pb., 1857. pp. 35-36.
158. M.G.S. Ramstedt, Uber der Ursprung der turkischen Sprache. Helsinki, 1937. pp. 81-91.
159. Pelliot P. L'edition collective des oevres de Wang Kouo-wei (T'oung Pao. Vol. 26). p. 167.
160. Ligeti L. Mots de civilisation de Haute Asie en transcription chinoise // Acta Orientalia. 1950, p. 141-149.
161. Only 30 arrows coulf fit in a quiver (see: Inostrantsev K.A., Sasanid etudes, SPb., 1909).
162. Bichurin N.Ya. (Iakinf), Collection of information on peoples in Central Asia in ancient times, Moscow-Leningrad, 1950, vol. 1. p. 214.

After 60 years of neglect, a first English translation of L.Gumilev's work is about to be published in 2010. It is a good start and a welcome development: