Product Code Database
The Xiongnu (, ) were a tribal confederation of Nomad who, according to ancient Chinese sources, inhabited the eastern Eurasian Steppe from the 3rd century BC to the late 1st century AD. Modu Chanyu, the supreme leader after 209 BC, founded the Xiongnu Empire.
After overthrowing their previous overlords, "The primary focus of the new threat became the Xiongnu who emerged rather abruptly in the late 4th century BC. Initially subordinated to the Yuezhi, the Xiongnu overthrew the nomadic hierarchy while also escalating its attacks on Chinese areas." the Yuezhi, the Xiongnu became the dominant power on the of East Asia, centred on the Mongolian Plateau. The Xiongnu were also active in areas now part of Siberia, Inner Mongolia, Gansu and Xinjiang. Their relations with the Chinese dynasties to the south-east were complex—alternating between various periods of peace, war, and subjugation. Ultimately, the Xiongnu were defeated by the Han dynasty in a centuries-long conflict, which led to the confederation splitting in two, and forcible resettlement of large numbers of Xiongnu within Han borders. During the Sixteen Kingdoms era, listed as one of the "Five Barbarians", their descendants founded the dynastic states of Han-Zhao, Northern Liang and Helian Xia and during the Northern and Southern dynasties founded Northern Zhou (founded by member of Yuwen tribe of Xiongnu origin) in northern China.
Attempts to associate the Xiongnu with the nearby Sakas and Sarmatians were once controversial. However, archaeogenetics has confirmed their interaction with the Xiongnu, and also possibly their relation to the Huns. The identity of the ethnic core of Xiongnu has been a subject of varied hypotheses, because only a few words, mainly titles and personal names, were preserved in the Chinese sources. The name Xiongnu may be cognate with that of the Huns or the Huna people, although this is disputed. Other linguistic links—all of them also controversial—proposed by scholars include Turkic languages, Iranian,: "Their royal tribes and kings ( shan-yü) bore Iranian names and all the Hsiung-nu words noted by the Chinese can be explained from an Iranian language of Saka type. It is therefore clear that the majority of Hsiung-nu tribes spoke an Eastern Iranian language." Mongolic, Uralic languages, Yeniseian, or multi-ethnic.
During the Western Zhou (1045–771 BC), there were numerous conflicts with nomadic tribes from the north and the northwest, variously known as the Xianyun, Guifang, or various "Rong" tribes, such as the Xirong, Shanrong or Quanrong. These tribes are recorded as harassing Zhou territory, but at the time the Zhou were expanding northwards, encroaching on their traditional lands, especially into the Wei River. Archaeologically, the Zhou expanded to the north and the northwest at the expense of the Siwa culture. The Quanrong put an end to the Western Zhou in 771 BC, sacking the Zhou capital of Haojing and killing the last Western Zhou king You. Thereafter the task of dealing with the northern tribes was left to their vassal, the Qin state.
To the west, the Pazyryk culture (6th–3rd century BC) immediately preceded the formation of the Xiongnus. A Scythian culture, it was identified by excavated artifacts and mummified humans, such as the Siberian Ice Maiden, found in the permafrost, in the Altai Mountains, Kazakhstan and nearby Mongolia. To the south, the Ordos culture had developed in the Ordos Loop (modern Inner Mongolia, China) during the Bronze Age and early Iron Age from the 6th to 2nd centuries BC. Of unknown ethno-linguistic origin, it is thought to represent the easternmost extension of Indo-European-speakers.: "From that time until the HAN dynasty the Ordos steppe was the home of semi-nomadic Indo-European peoples whose culture can be regarded as an eastern province of a vast Eurasian continuum of Scytho-Siberian cultures.": "From the first millennium b.c., we have abundant historical, archaeological and linguistic sources for the location of the territory inhabited by the Iranian peoples. In this period the territory of the northern Iranians, they being equestrian nomads, extended over the whole zone of the steppes and the wooded steppes and even the semi-deserts from the Great Hungarian Plain to the Ordos in northern China." The Yuezhi were displaced by the Xiongnu expansion in the 2nd century BC, and had to migrate to Central and Southern Asia.
/ref>Shiji Ch. 110: Xiongnu liezhuan quote: "匈奴，其先祖夏后氏之苗裔也，曰淳維。" Even so, Sima Qian also drew a distinct line between the settled Huaxia people (Han) to the pastoral nomads (Xiongnu), characterizing them as two polar groups in the sense of a civilization versus an uncivilized society: the Hua–Yi distinction. Sima Qian also mentioned Xiongnu's early appearance north of Wild Goose Gate and Dai Commandery commanderies before 265 BC, just before the Zhao-Xiongnu War; Shiji Vol. 81 "Stories about Lian Po and Lin Xiangru - Addendum: Li Mu" text: "李牧者，趙之北邊良將也。常居代鴈門，備匈奴。" translation: "About Li Mu, he was a good general at Zhao's northern borders. He often stationed at Dai and Wild Goose Gate, prepared against the Xiongnu."Theobald, Ulrich (2019) "Li Mu 李牧" in ChinaKnowledge.de - An Encyclopaedia on Chinese History, Literature and Art however, sinologist Edwin Pulleyblank (1994) contends that pre-241-BC references to the Xiongnu are anachronistic substitutions for the Donghu people instead. Sometimes the Xiongnu were distinguished from other nomadic peoples; namely, the Donghu people; yet on other occasions, Chinese sources often just classified the Xiongnu as a Five Barbarians, which was a blanket term for nomadic people. Even Sima Qian was inconsistent: in the chapter "Hereditary House of Zhao", he considered the Donghu to be the Hu proper, Shiji, "Hereditary House of Zhao" quote: "今中山在我腹心，北有燕，東有 胡，西有林胡、樓煩、秦、韓之邊，而無彊兵之救，是亡社稷，柰何？" translation: "(King Wuling of Zhao to Lou Huan:) Now Zhongshan is at our heart and belly note:, Yan to the north, Hu to the east, Forest Hu, Loufan, Qin, Han at our borders to the west. Yet we have no strong army to help us, surely we will lose our country. What is to be done?"Compare a parallel passage in Stratagems of the Warring States, "King Wuling spends his day in idleness", quote: "自常山以至代、上黨，東有燕、 東胡之境，西有樓煩、秦、韓之邊，而無騎射之備。" Jennifer Dodgson's translation: "From Mount Chang to Dai and Shangdang, our lands border Yan and the Donghu in the east, and to the west we have the Loufan and shared borders with Qin and Han. Nevertheless, we have no mounted archers ready for action." yet elsewhere he considered Xiongnu to be also Hu. Shiji, Vol. 110 "Account of the Xiongnu". quote: "後秦滅六國，而始皇帝使蒙恬將十萬之眾北擊 胡，悉收河南地。…… 匈奴單于曰頭曼，頭曼不勝秦，北徙。" translation: "Later on, Qin conquered the six other states, and the First Emperor dispatched general Meng Tian to lead a multitude of 100,000 north to attack the Hu; and he took all lands south the Yellow River. ... The Xiongnu chanyu was Touman; Touman could not win against Qin, so they fled north."
Ancient China often came in contact with the Xianyun and the Xirong nomadic peoples. In later Chinese historiography, some groups of these peoples were believed to be the possible progenitors of the Xiongnu people. These nomadic people often had repeated military confrontations with the Shang dynasty and especially the Zhou dynasty, who often conquered and enslaved the nomads in an expansion drift. During the Warring States period, the armies from the Qin, Zhao and Yan states were encroaching and conquering various nomadic territories that were inhabited by the Xiongnu and other Hu peoples.
Pulleyblank argued that the Xiongnu were part of a Xirong group called Yiqu, who had lived in Shaanbei and had been influenced by China for centuries, before they were driven out by the Qin dynasty. Qin's campaign against the Xiongnu expanded Qin's territory at the expense of the Xiongnu. After the unification of Qin dynasty, Xiongnu was a threat to the northern border of Qin. They were likely to attack the Qin dynasty when they suffered natural disasters.
In order to protect the Xiongnu from the threat of the Qin dynasty, Modu Chanyu united the Xiongnu into a powerful confederation. This transformed the Xiongnu into a more formidable polity, able to form larger armies and exercise improved strategic coordination. The Qin dynasty fell in 207 BC, and was replaced by the Western Han dynasty in 202 BC after a period of internal conflict. This period of Chinese instability was a time of prosperity for the Xiongnu, who adopted many Han Chinese agriculture techniques such as slaves for heavy labor and lived in Han-style homes.
After forging internal unity, Modu Chanyu expanded the Xiongnu empire in all directions. To the north he conquered a number of nomadic peoples, including the Dingling of southern Siberia. He crushed the power of the Donghu people of eastern Mongolia and Manchuria as well as the Yuezhi in the Hexi Corridor of Gansu, where his son, Jizhu, made a skull cup out of the Yuezhi king. Modu also retook the original homeland of Xiongnu on the Yellow River, which had previously been taken by the Qin general Meng Tian. Under Modu's leadership, the Xiongnu became powerful enough to threaten the Han dynasty.
In 200 BC, Modu besieged the first Han dynasty emperor Gaozu (Gao-Di) with his 320,000-strong army at Peteng Fortress in Baideng (present-day Datong, Shanxi). After Gaozu (Gao-Di) agreed to all Modu's terms, such as ceding the northern provinces to the Xiongnu and paying annual taxes, he was allowed to leave the siege. Although Gaozu was able to return to his capital Chang'an (present-day Xi'an), Modu occasionally threatened the Han's northern frontier and finally in 198 BC, a peace treaty was settled.
Xiongnu in their expansion drove their western neighbour Yuezhi from the Hexi Corridor in year 176 BC, killing the Yuezhi king and asserting their presence in the Western Regions.
By the time of Modu's death in 174 BC, the Xiongnu were recognized as the most prominent of the nomads bordering the Han empire According to the Book of Han, later quoted in Duan Chengshi's ninth-century Miscellaneous Morsels from Youyang:
After Modu, later leaders formed a dualistic system of political organisation with the left and right branches of the Xiongnu divided on a regional basis. The chanyu or shanyu, a ruler equivalent to the Emperor of China, exercised direct authority over the central territory. Longcheng (around the Khangai Mountains, Otuken) (Chinese language: 龍城; Mongolian: Luut; lit. "Dragon City") became the annual meeting place and served as the Xiongnu capital. The ruins of Longcheng were found south of Ulziit District, Arkhangai Province in 2017.
North of Shanxi with the Tuqi King of the Left was holding the area north of Beijing and the Tuqi King of the Right was holding the Ordos Loop area as far as Gansu.
The Han dynasty sent commoner women falsely labeled as "princesses" and members of the Han imperial family to the Xiongnu multiple times when they were practicing Heqin () marriage alliances with the Xiongnu in order to avoid sending the emperor's daughters. The Han sent these "princesses" to marry Xiongnu leaders in their efforts to stop the border raids. Along with arranged marriages, the Han sent gifts to bribe the Xiongnu to stop attacking. After the defeat at Datong in 200 BC, the Han emperor abandoned a military solution to the Xiongnu threat. Instead, in 198 BC, the courtier was dispatched for negotiations. The peace settlement eventually reached between the parties included a Han princess given in marriage to the chanyu; periodic gifts to the Xiongnu of silk, distilled beverages and rice; equal status between the states; and a boundary wall as a mutual border.
This first treaty set the pattern for relations between the Han dynasty and the Xiongnu for sixty years. Up to 135 BC, the treaty was renewed nine times, each time with an increase in the "gifts" to the Xiongnu Empire. In 192 BC, Modu Chanyu even asked for the hand of Emperor Gaozu of Han widow Empress Lü Zhi. His son and successor, the energetic Jiyu, known as Laoshang Chanyu, continued his father's expansionist policies. Laoshang succeeded in negotiating terms with Emperor Wen for the maintenance of a large scale government sponsored market system.
While the Xiongnu benefited handsomely, from the Chinese perspective marriage treaties were costly, very humiliating and ineffective. Laoshang Chanyu showed that he did not take the peace treaty seriously. On one occasion his scouts penetrated to a point near Chang'an. In 166 BC he personally led 140,000 cavalry to invade Anding, reaching as far as the imperial retreat at Yong. In 158 BC, his successor sent 30,000 cavalry to attack Shangdang and another 30,000 to Yunzhong.
The Xiongnu also practiced marriage alliances with Han dynasty officers and officials who defected to their side by marrying off sisters and daughters of the Chanyu to Han Chinese who joined the Xiongnu and Xiongnu in Han service. The daughter of Laoshang Chanyu (and older sister of Junchen Chanyu and Yizhixie Chanyu) was married to the Xiongnu General Zhao Xin, the Marquis of Xi who was serving the Han dynasty. The daughter of Qiedihou Chanyu was married to the Han Chinese General Li Ling after he surrendered and defected. Another Han Chinese General who defected to the Xiongnu was Li Guangli, a general in the War of the Heavenly Horses, who also married a daughter of the Hulugu Chanyu. The Han Chinese diplomat Su Wu married a Xiongnu woman given by Li Ling when he was arrested and taken captive. Han Chinese explorer Zhang Qian married a Xiongnu woman and had a child with her when he was taken captive by the Xiongnu.
The of the Yenisei Kyrgyz Khaganate claimed descent from the Chinese general Li Ling, grandson of the Han dynasty general Li Guang.Leonid R. Kyzlasov (2025). 9789732719626, Romanian Academy Institute of Archaeology of Iaşi Editura Academiei Romane - Editura Istros. . ISBN 9789732719626 Li Ling was captured by the Xiongnu and defected in the first century BC. And since the Tang royal Li family also claimed descent from Li Guang, the Kirghiz Khagan was therefore recognized as a member of the Tang Imperial family. This relationship soothed the relationship when Kyrgyz khagan Are Khagan (阿熱) invaded Uyghur Khaganate and executed Qasar Qaghan. The news brought to Chang'an by Kyrgyz ambassador Zhuwu Hesu (註吾合素).
While the Han dynasty had been making preparations for a military confrontation since the reign of Emperor Wen, the break did not come until 133 BC, following an abortive trap to ambush the Chanyu at Mayi. By that point the empire was consolidated politically, militarily and economically, and was led by an adventurous pro-war faction at court. In that year, Emperor Wu reversed the decision he had made the year before to renew the peace treaty.
Full-scale war broke out in late 129 BC, when 40,000 Han cavalry made a surprise attack on the Xiongnu at the border markets. In 127 BC, the Han general Wei Qing retook the Ordos. In 121 BC, the Xiongnu suffered another setback when Huo Qubing led a force of light cavalry westward out of Longxi and within six days fought his way through five Xiongnu kingdoms. The Xiongnu Hunye king was forced to surrender with 40,000 men. In 119 BC both Huo and Wei, each leading 50,000 cavalrymen and 100,000 footsoldiers (in order to keep up with the mobility of the Xiongnu, many of the non-cavalry Han soldiers were mobile infantrymen who traveled on horseback but fought on foot), and advancing along different routes, forced the Chanyu and his Xiongnu court to flee north of the Gobi Desert.
Major logistical difficulties limited the duration and long-term continuation of these campaigns. According to the analysis of Yan You (嚴尤), the difficulties were twofold. Firstly there was the problem of supplying food across long distances. Secondly, the weather in the northern Xiongnu lands was difficult for Han soldiers, who could never carry enough fuel. According to official reports, the Xiongnu lost 80,000 to 90,000 men, and out of the 140,000 horses the Han forces had brought into the desert, fewer than 30,000 returned to the Han Empire.
In 104 and 102 BC, the Han fought and won the War of the Heavenly Horses against the Kingdom of Dayuan. As a result, the Han gained many which further aided them in their battle against the Xiongnu. As a result of these battles, the Han Empire controlled the strategic region from the Ordos Desert and Gansu corridor to Lop Nor. They succeeded in separating the Xiongnu from the Qiang peoples to the south, and also gained direct access to the Western Regions. Because of strong Han control over the Xiongnu, the Xiongnu became unstable and were no longer a threat to the Han Empire.
Huhanye sent his son, the "wise king of the right" Shuloujutang, to the Han court as hostage. In 51 BC he personally visited Chang'an to pay homage to the emperor on the Lunar New Year. In the same year, another envoy Qijushan was received at the Ganquan Palace in the north-west of modern Shanxi. On the financial side, Huhanye was amply rewarded in large quantities of gold, cash, clothes, silk, horses and grain for his participation. Huhanye made two further homage trips, in 49 BC and 33 BC; with each one the imperial gifts were increased. On the last trip, Huhanye took the opportunity to ask to be allowed to become an imperial son-in-law. As a sign of the decline in the political status of the Xiongnu, Emperor Yuan refused, giving him instead five ladies-in-waiting. One of them was Wang Zhaojun, famed in Chinese folklore as one of the Four Beauties.
When Zhizhi learned of his brother's submission, he also sent a son to the Han court as hostage in 53 BC. Then twice –in 51 BC and 50 BC– he sent envoys to the Han court with tribute. But having failed to pay homage personally, he was never admitted to the tributary system. In 36 BC, a junior officer named Chen Tang, with the help of Gan Yanshou, protector-general of the Western Regions, assembled an expeditionary force that defeated him at the Battle of Zhizhi and sent his head as a trophy to Chang'an.
Tributary relations were discontinued during the reign of Huduershi (18–48 AD), corresponding to the political upheavals of the Xin dynasty. The Xiongnu took the opportunity to regain control of the western regions, as well as neighboring peoples such as the Wuhuan. In 24 AD, Hudershi even talked about reversing the tributary system.
In 48 AD, a confederation of eight Xiongnu tribes in Bi's power base in the south, with a military force totalling 40,000 to 50,000 men, seceded from Punu's kingdom and acclaimed Bi as chanyu. This kingdom became known as the Southern Xiongnu.
In the 60s, the Northern Xiongnu resumed hostilities as they attempted to expand their influence into the Western Regions and launched raids on the Han borders. In 73, the Han responded by sending Dou Gu and Geng Chong to lead a great expedition against the Northern Xiongnu in the Tarim Basin. The expedition, which saw the exploits of the famed general, Ban Chao, was initially successful, but the Han had to temporarily withdraw in 75 due to matters back home. Ban Chao remained behind and maintained Chinese influence over the Western Regions before his death in 102.
For the next decade, the Northern Xiongnu had to endure famines largely due to locust plagues. In 87, they suffered a major defeat to the Xianbei, who killed their chanyu Youliu and took his skin as a trophy. With the Northern Xiongnu in disarray, the Han general, Dou Xian launched an expedition and crushed them at the Battle of the Altai Mountains in 89. After another Han attack in 91, the Northern Chanyu fled with his followers to the northwest, and was not seen again, while those that remained behind surrendered to the Han.
In 94, dissatisfied with the newly appointed chanyu, the surrendered Northern Xiongnu rebelled and acclaimed Fenghou as their chanyu, who led them to flee outside the border. However, the separatist regime continued to face famines and the growing threat of the Xianbei, prompting 10,000 of them to return to Han in 96. Fenghou later sent envoys to Han intending to submit as a vassal but was rejected. The Northern Xiongnu were scattered, with most of them being absorbed by the Xianbei. In 118, a defeated Fenghou brought around 100 followers to surrender to Han.
Remnants of the Northern Xiongnu held out in the Tarim Basin as they allied themselves with the Jushi Kingdom and captured Hami in 119. By 126, they were subjugated by the Han general, Ban Yong, while a branch led by a "Huyan King" continued to resist. The Huyan King was last mentioned in 151 when he launched an attack on Yiwu but was driven away by Han forces. According to the fifth-century Book of Wei, the remnants of Northern Chanyu (2025). 9781317340904, Routledge. ISBN 9781317340904
The Southern Xiongnu served as Han auxiliaries to defend the northern borders from nomadic forces and even played a role in defeating the Northern Xiongnu. However, with the fall of their northern counterpart, the Southern Xiongnu continued to suffer the brunt of raids, this time by the Xianbei people of the steppe. In addition to the poor climate and living conditions of the frontiers, the Chinese court would also interfere in the Southern Xiongnu's politics and install chanyus loyal to the Han. As a result, the Southern Xiongnu often rebelled, at times joining forces with the Wuhuan and receiving support from the Xianbei.
During the late 2nd century AD, the Chanyu began sending his people to deal with the Han's internal matters; first against the Yellow Turban Rebellion and then another rebellion in Hebei in 188. Many of the Xiongnu feared that it would set a precedent for unending military service to the Han court. At the time, another Han vassal, the Chuge people had revolted in Bingzhou and killed the provincial inspector. Subsequently, a rebellious faction among the Southern Xiongnu allied with the Xiuchuge and killed the Chanyu as well. The Han court appointed his son, Yufuluo, entitled Chizhi Shizhu (持至尸逐侯), to succeed him, but he was expelled from his territory by the rebels.
Yufuluo travelled to Luoyang to seek aid from the Han court, but the court was in disorder from the clash between Grand General He Jin and the Ten Attendants, and the intervention of the warlord Dong Zhuo. The Chanyu subsequently settled down with his followers around Linfen, east of the Fen River in Shanxi. In 195, he died and was succeeded as chanyu by his brother Huchuquan. Meanwhile, the rebels initially elected their own chanyu, but after he died just a year into his reign, they left the position vacant and had an elderly nominal king put in his place. With the Southern Xiongnu in disarray, many of the tribes opted to distance themselves from the ongoing Han civil war. Yufuluo's group and the Xiuchuge were drawn into the conflict from time to time before they were all subdued by the warlord Cao Cao. Rafe De Crespigny (1984). 9780867844108, Faculty of Asian Studies, Australian National University. ISBN 9780867844108
The Southern Xiongnu upheaval caused several frontier commanderies such as Shuofang and Yunzhong to be lost to hostile tribes, prompting Cao Cao to abolish and abandon them. In 216, he detained Huchuquan in the city of Ye and reorganized the last vestiges of the Southern Xiongnu into the Five Divisions (Left, Right, South, North and Centre) around Taiyuan Commandery in modern-day Shanxi, bringing them closer to the Chinese court's influence. The office of chanyu remained with Huchuquan at Ye until his death, after which it became vacant, while the Five Divisions were placed under the supervision of his uncle, Qubei. Each division was led by a local chief, who in turn was under the surveillance of a Chinese resident. This was aimed at preventing the tribes in Shanxi from engaging in rebellion, and also allowed Cao Cao to use them as auxiliaries in his cavalry.
With the fall of the Southern Xiongnu state, the Xiongnu name gradually lost its unifying influence among its descendants, only ever invoked for political and symbolic purposes or as a generic label for tribes that did not belong to one of the major ethnic groups at the time. In Bingzhou, the Chuge identity held more weight than that of the Xiongnu among the Five Divisions, while those excluded from the group mingled with tribes from various ethnicities and were referred to as " hu" or other vague terms for the non-Chinese. Many of them began adopting Chinese family names such as Liu, which was prevalent among the Five Divisions.
Nonetheless, the Xiongnu are classified as one of the "Five Barbarians" of the Sixteen Kingdoms period. The Han-Zhao and Helian Xia dynasties were both founded by rulers on the basis of their Xiongnu ancestry. The Northern Liang, established by the Lushuihu, is sometimes categorized as a Xiongnu state in recent historiographies. Shi Le, the founder of the Later Zhao dynasty, was a descendant of the Xiongnu Qiangqu tribe, although by his time, he and his people had become a separate ethnic group known as the Jie people.
Liu Yuan, the son of Liu Bao and a general serving under one of the Jin princes, was offered by the Five Divisions to lead their rebellion. After deceiving his prince, Liu Yuan returned to Bingzhou and was acclaimed as the Grand Chanyu. Later that year, he declared himself the King of Han. Liu Yuan and his family members were Chuge people, but he also claimed to be a direct descendant of the Southern Xiongnu chanyus and depicted his state as a continuation of the Han dynasty, citing that his alleged ancestors were married to Han princesses through heqin. He adopted the Chinese ruling system and allowed the Han Chinese and non-Chinese tribes to serve under him. In 308, he elevated his title to Emperor of Han, and in 309, he settled his capital at Linfen.
The Western Jin, devastated by war and natural disasters, was unable to stop the growing threat of the Han. A few months after Liu Cong took the Han throne, the Jin imperial army was annihilated by his forces in 311. Soon, the Han descended upon the Jin capital Luoyang, sacking the city and capturing Emperor Huai of Jin in an event known as the Disaster of Yongjia. In 316, the Jin restoration in Chang'an, headed by Emperor Min, was also crushed by the Han. After the fall of Chang'an, the remnants of the Jin south of the Yangtze at Jiankang re-established themselves as the Eastern Jin dynasty in 318.
Despite military success, the Han's imperial authority was limited. They suffered from internal strife under Liu Cong, who was described as a cruel and dissolute ruler. Faced with stern opposition from his own ministers, he greatly empowered his Consort kin and eunuchs to counter them, throwing the Han court into a power struggle which ended in a brutal purge. Liu Cong also failed to constrain Shi Le, a general of Jie people ethnicity who effectively held the eastern parts of the empire. After Liu Cong's death in 318, the consort kin, Jin Zhun massacred the imperial family in Pingyang before he was defeated by a combined force led by Liu Cong's cousin, Liu Yao, and Shi Le.
Liu Yao retained control over the Guanzhong region and expanded his domain westward by campaigning against remnants of the Jin, Former Liang and Chouchi. Eventually, Liu Yao led his army to fight Later Zhao for control over Luoyang but was captured by Shi Le's forces in battle and executed in 329. Chang'an soon fell to Later Zhao and the last of Former Zhao's forces were destroyed. Thus ended the Han-Zhao dynasty; northern China would be dominated by the Later Zhao for the next 20 years. The Chuge people would remain a prominent ethnic group in northern China for the next two centuries.
Liu Bobo, a surviving member of the Tiefu, went into exile and eventually offered his services to the Qiang-led Later Qin. He was assigned to guard Shuofang, but in 407, angered by Qin holding peace talks with the Northern Wei, he rebelled and founded a state known as the Helian Xia dynasty. Bobo strongly affirmed his Xiongnu lineage; his state name of "Xia" was based on the claim that the Xiongnu were descendants of the Xia dynasty, and he later changed his family name from "Liu" (劉) to the more Xiongnu-like "Helian" (赫連), believing it inappropriate to follow his matrilineal line from the Han. Helian Bobo placed the Later Qin in a perpetual state of warfare and greatly contributed to its decline. In 418, he conquered the Guanzhong region from the Eastern Jin dynasty after the Jin destroyed Qin the previous year.
After Helian Bobo's death in 425, the Xia quickly declined due to pressure from the Northern Wei. In 428, the emperor, Helian Chang and capital were both captured by Wei forces. His brother, Helian Ding succeeded him and conquered the Western Qin in 431, but that same year, he was ambushed and imprisoned by the Tuyuhun while attempting a campaign against Northern Liang. The Xia was at its end, and the following year, Helian Ding was sent to Wei where he was executed.
Tongwancheng (meaning "Unite All Nations"), was one of the capitals of the Xia that was built during the reign of Helian Bobo. The ruined city was discovered in 1996 and the State Council designated it as a cultural relic under top state protection. The repair of the Yong'an Platform, where Helian Bobo reviewed parading troops, was completed and restoration on the tall turret follows.
In the 1994 UNESCO-published History of Civilizations of Central Asia, its editor János Harmatta claims that the royal tribes and kings of the Xiongnu bore Iranian names, that all Xiongnu words noted by the Chinese can be explained from a Scythian language, and that it is therefore clear that the majority of Xiongnu tribes spoke an Eastern Iranian language.
According to a study by Alexander Savelyev and Choongwon Jeong, published in 2020 in the journal Evolutionary Human Sciences, "The predominant part of the Xiongnu population is likely to have spoken Turkic". However, important cultural, technological and political elements may have been transmitted by Eastern Iranian-speaking Steppe nomads: "Arguably, these Iranian-speaking groups were assimilated over time by the predominant Turkic-speaking part of the Xiongnu population". Text was copied from this source, which is available under a . "Such a distribution of Xiongnu words may be an indication that both Turkic and Eastern Iranian-speaking groups were present among the Xiongnu in the earlier period of their history. Etymological analysis shows that some crucial components in the Xiongnu political, economic and cultural package, including dairy pastoralism and elements of state organization, may have been imported by the Eastern Iranians. Arguably, these Iranian-speaking groups were assimilated over time by the predominant Turkic-speaking part of the Xiongnu population. ... The genetic profile of published Xiongnu individuals speaks against the Yeniseian hypothesis, assuming that modern Yeniseian speakers (i.e. Kets) are representative of the ancestry components in the historical Yeniseian speaking groups in southern Siberia. In contrast to the Iron Age populations listed in Table 2, Kets do not have the Iranian-related ancestry component but harbour a strong genetic affinity with Samoyedic-speaking neighbours, such as Selkups (Jeong et al., 2018, 2019)."
Pulleybank and D. N. Keightley asserted that the Xiongnu titles "were originally Siberian words but were later borrowed by the Turkic and Mongolic peoples". Titles such as Tarkhan, tegin and Khagan were also inherited from the Xiongnu language and are possibly of Yeniseian origin. For example, the Xiongnu word for "heaven" is theorized to come from Proto-Yeniseian * tɨŋVr.
Vocabulary from Xiongnu inscriptions sometimes appears to have Yeniseian cognates which were used by Vovin to support his theory that the Xiongnu has a large Yeniseian component, examples of proposed cognates include words such as Xiongnu kʷala 'son' and Ket qalek 'younger son', Xiongnu sakdak 'boot' and Ket sagdi 'boot', Xiongnu gʷawa "prince" and Ket gij "prince", Xiongnu "attij" 'wife' and proto-Yeniseian "alrit", Ket "alit" and Xiongnu dar "north" compared to Yugh tɨr "north". Pulleyblank also argued that because Xiongnu words appear to have clusters with r and l, in the beginning of the word it is unlikely to be of Turkic origin, and instead believed that most vocabulary we have mostly resemble Yeniseian languages.
Alexander Vovin also wrote, that some names of horses in the Xiongnu language appear to be Turkic words with Yeniseian prefixes.
An analysis by Savelyev and Jeong (2020) has cast doubt on the Yeniseian theory. If assuming that the ancient Yeniseians were represented by modern Ket people, who are more genetically similar to Samoyedic speakers, the Xiongnu do not display a genetic affinity for Yeniseian peoples. A review by Wilson (2023) argues that the presence of Yeniseian-speakers among the multi-ethnic Xiongnu should not be rejected, and that "Yeniseian-speaking peoples must have played a more prominent (than heretofore recognized) role in the history of Eurasia during the first millennium of the Common Era".
Bonmann and Fries (2025) argued that the Xiongnu and succeeding Huns were of multi-ethnic origin, but had, at least a partial, Paleo-Siberian, specifically Yeniseian ethnic core, corresponding to the early Arin language.
Other proponents of a Turkic language theory include E.H. Parker, Jean-Pierre Abel-Rémusat, Julius Klaproth, Gustaf John Ramstedt, Annemarie von Gabain, and Charles Hucker. André Wink states that the Xiongnu probably spoke an early form of Turkic; even if Xiongnu were not "Turks" nor Turkic-speaking, they were in close contact with Turkic-speakers very early on. Craig Benjamin sees the Xiongnu as either proto-Turks or proto-Mongols who possibly spoke a language related to the Dingling.Craig Benjamin (2007, 49), In: Hyun Jin Kim, The Huns, Rome and the Birth of Europe. Cambridge University Press. 2013. page 176.
Chinese sources link several Turkic peoples to the Xiongnu:
However, Chinese sources also ascribe Xiongnu origins to the Para-Mongolic-speaking Kumo Xi and Khitans.
According to the Book of Song, the Rouran Khaganate, which the Book of Wei identified as offspring of proto-MongolsPulleyblank, Edwin G. (2000). "Ji 姬 and Jiang 姜: The Role of Exogamic Clans in the Organization of the Zhou Polity", Early China. p. 20 Donghu people,Wei Shou. Book of Wei. vol. 91 "蠕蠕，東胡之苗裔也，姓郁久閭氏" tr. "Rúrú, offsprings of Dōnghú, surnamed Yùjiŭlǘ" possessed the alternative name(s) 大檀 Dàtán "Tatar" and/or 檀檀 Tántán "Tartar" and according to the Book of Liang, "they also constituted a separate branch of the Xiongnu". Liangshu Vol. 54 txt: "芮芮國，蓋匈奴別種。" tr: "Ruìruì state, possibly a Xiongnu's separate branch"Golden, Peter B. "Some Notes on the Avars and Rouran", in The Steppe Lands and the World beyond Them. Ed. Curta, Maleon. Iași (2013). pp. 54-55 The Old Book of Tang mentioned twenty Shiwei tribes,Liu Xu et al. Old Book of Tang "vol. 199 section: Shiwei" which other Chinese sources (the Book of Sui and the New Book of Tang) associated with the Khitan people,Xu Elina-Qian (2005). Historical Development of the Pre-Dynastic Khitan. University of Helsinki. p. 173-178 another people who in turn descended from the XianbeiXu Elina-Qian (2005). Historical Development of the Pre-Dynastic Khitan. University of Helsinki. p. 99. quote: "According to Gai Zhiyong's study, Jishou is identical with Qishou, the earliest ancestor of the Khitan; and Shihuai is identical to Tanshihuai, the Xianbei supreme chief in the period of the Eastern Han (25-220). Therefore, from the sentence "His ancestor was Jishou who was derived from Shihuai" in the above inscription, it can be simply seen that the Khitan originated from the Xianbei. Since the excavated inscription on memorial tablet can be regarded as a firsthand historical source, this piece of information is quite reliable." and were also associated with the Xiongnu.Xue Juzheng et al. Old History of the Five Dynasties vol. 137 quote: "契丹者，古匈奴之種也。" translation: "The Khitans, a kind of Xiongnu of yore." While the Xianbei, Khitans, and Shiwei are generally believed to be predominantly Mongolic- and Para-Mongolic-speaking,Schönig, Claus. (27 January 2006) "Turko-Mongolic relations" in Janhunen (ed.) The Mongolic Languages. Routledge. p. 393.Shimunek, Andrew. "Early Serbi-Mongolic-Tungusic lexical contact: Jurchen numerals from the 室韦 Shirwi (Shih-wei) in North China". Philology of the Grasslands: Essays in Mongolic, Turkic, and Tungusic Studies, Edited by Ákos Bertalan Apatóczky et al. (Leiden: Brill). Retrieved 22 September 2019. quote: "Asdemonstrated by Ratchnevsky (1966: 231), the Shirwi confederation was a multiethnic, multilingual confederation of Tungusic-speaking Mo-ho 靺鞨 people (i.e. ancestors of the Jurchen), the Meng-wa 蒙瓦 ~ Meng-wu 蒙兀, whom Pelliot (1928) and others have shown were Proto-Mongolic speakers, and other groups. The dominant group among the Shirwi undoubtedly were ethnolinguistic descendants of the Serbi (鮮卑 Hsien-pei), and spoke a language closely related to Kitan and more distantly related to Mongolic." yet Xianbei were stated to descend from the Donghu people, whom Sima Qian distinguished from the Xiongnu Shiji "vol. 110: Account of the Xiongnu" quote: "東胡初輕冒頓，不爲備。及冒頓以兵至，擊，大破滅東胡王，而虜其民人及畜產。" translation: "Initially the Donghu despised Modun and were unprepared. So Modun arrived with his troops, attacked, routed the and killed Donghu king; then Modun captured his people as well as livestock." Book of Later Han. "Vol. 90 section Xianbei". text: "鮮卑者, 亦東胡之支也, 别依鮮卑山, 故因為號焉. 漢初, 亦為冒頓所破, 遠竄遼東塞." Xu (2005:24)'s translation: "The Xianbei who were a branch of the Donghu, relied upon the Xianbei Mountains. Therefore, they were called the Xianbei. At the beginning of the Han Dynasty (206 B.C.-A.D. 220), (they) were defeated by Maodun, and then fled in disorder to Liaodong beyond the northern border of China Proper"Xu Elina-Qian (2005). Historical Development of the Pre-Dynastic Khitan. University of Helsinki. p. 24-25 (notwithstanding Sima Qian's inconsistency). Additionally, Chinese chroniclers routinely ascribed Xiongnu origins to various nomadic groups: for examples, Xiongnu ancestry was ascribed to Para-Mongolic-speaking Kumo Xi, as well as the Turkic-speaking Göktürks and Tiele people;
Genghis Khan refers to the time of Modu Chanyu as "the remote times of our Chanyu" in his letter to Daoist Qiu Chuji. Moreover, the sun and moon symbol of Xiongnu discovered by archaeologists is similar to Mongolian Soyombo symbol. Elite Xiongnu Burials at the Periphery (Miller et al. 2009)
Chinese sources link the Tiele people and Ashina to the Xiongnu, not all Turkic peoples. According to the Book of Zhou and the History of the Northern Dynasties, the Ashina tribe clan was a component of the Xiongnu confederation,Linghu Defen et al., Book of Zhou, Vol. 50. Li Yanshou (李延寿), History of the Northern Dynasties, Vol. 99. but this connection is disputed, and according to the Book of Sui and the Tongdian, they were "mixed nomads" () from Pingliang.Wei Zheng et al., Book of Sui, Vol. 84. (1988). 9787101002584, Zhonghua Book Company. ISBN 9787101002584 The Ashina and Tiele may have been separate ethnic groups who mixed with the Xiongnu. Indeed, Chinese sources link many nomadic peoples ( hu; see Five Barbarians) on their northern borders to the Xiongnu, just as Greco-Roman historiographers called Pannonian Avars and Huns "Scythians". The Greek cognate of Tourkia () was used by the Byzantine Empire emperor and scholar Constantine VII in his book De Administrando Imperio,Romilly James Heald Jenkins (1967). 9780884020219, Dumbarton Oaks Center for Byzantine Studies. . ISBN 9780884020219 According to Constantine Porphyrogenitus, writing in his De Administrando Imperio (ca. 950 AD) "Patzinakia, the Pechenegs, stretches west as far as the Siret River (or even the Eastern Carpathian Mountains), and is four days distant from Tourkia (i.e. Hungary)." though in his use, "Turks" always referred to Magyars. Such archaizing was a common literary topos, and implied similar geographic origins and nomadic lifestyle but not direct filiation.
Some Yugur claimed descent from the Xiongnu (according to Chinese history Weishu, the founder of the Uyghur Khaganate was descended from a Xiongnu ruler), but many contemporary scholars do not consider the modern Uyghurs to be of direct linear descent from the old Uyghur Khaganate because modern Uyghur language and Old Uyghur languages are different. Rather, they consider them to be descendants of a number of people, one of them the ancient Uyghurs. (2025). 9780765613189, M. E. Sharpe. ISBN 9780765613189
In various kinds of ancient inscriptions on monuments of Munmu of Silla, it is recorded that King Munmu had Xiongnu ancestry. According to several historians, it is possible that there were tribes of Koreanic origin. There are also some Korean researchers that point out that the grave goods of Silla and of the eastern Xiongnu are alike.김창호, 〈문무왕릉비에 보이는 신라인의 조상인식 – 태조성한의 첨보 -〉, 《한국사연구》, 한국사연구회, 1986년
Portraits found in the Noin-Ula excavations demonstrate other cultural evidence and influences, showing that Chinese and Xiongnu art influenced each other mutually. Some of these embroidered portraits in the Noin-Ula also depict the Xiongnu with long braided hair with wide ribbons, which is seen to be identical with the Ashina tribe hair-style.Camilla Trever, "Excavations in Northern Mongolia (1924–1925)", Leningrad: J. Fedorov Printing House, 1932 [32] Well-preserved bodies in Xiongnu and pre-Xiongnu tombs in Mongolia and southern Siberia show both East Asian and West Eurasian features.The Great Empires of the Ancient World – Thomas Harrison – 2009 – page 288
Analysis of cranial remains from some sites attributed to the Xiongnu have revealed that they had dolichocephalic skulls with East Asian craniometrical features, setting them apart from neighboring populations in present-day Mongolia. Russian and Chinese anthropological and craniofacial studies show that the Xiongnu were physically very heterogenous, with six different population clusters showing different degrees of West Eurasian and East Asian physical traits.
Presently, there exist four fully excavated and well documented cemeteries: Ivolga,A. V. Davydova, Ivolginskii arkheologicheskii kompleks II. Ivolginskii mogil'nik. Arkheologicheskie pamiatniki Siunnu 2 (Sankt-Peterburg 1996). А. В. Давыдова, Иволгинский археологи-ческий комплекс II. Иволгинский могильник. Археологические памятники Сюнну 2 (Санкт-Петербург 1996). Dyrestui,S. S. Miniaev, Dyrestuiskii mogil'nik. Arkheologicheskie pamiatniki Siunnu 3 (Sankt-Peterburg 1998). С. С. Миняев, Дырестуйский могильник. Археологические памятники Сюнну 3 (Санкт-Петербург 1998). Burkhan Tolgoi,Ts. Törbat, Keramika khunnskogo mogil'nika
Burkhan-Tolgoi. Erdem shinzhilgeenii bichig. Arkheologi, antropologi, ugsaatan sudlal 19,2003, 82–100. Ц. Тѳрбат, Керамика хуннского могильника Бурхан-Толгой. Эрдэм шинжилгээний бичиг. Археологи, антропологи, угсаатан судлал 19, 2003, 82–100.Ts. Törbat, Tamiryn Ulaan khoshuuny bulsh ba Khünnügiin ugsaatny büreldekhüünii asuudald. Tükhiin setgüül 4, 2003, 6–17. Ц. Төрбат, Тамирын Улаан хошууны булш ба Хүннүгийн угсаатны бүрэлдэхүүний асуудалд. Түүхийн сэтгүүл 4, 2003, 6–17. and Daodunzi.Bryan Miller (2025). 9783936490145, Vor- und Fruhgeschichtliche Archaeologie Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universitat Bonn. . ISBN 9783936490145 Additionally thousands of tombs have been recorded in and Mongolia.
The archaeologists at a Xiongnu cemetery in Arkhangai Province said the following:
"There is no clear indication of the ethnicity of this tomb occupant, but in a similar brick-chambered tomb of the late Eastern Han period at the same cemetery, archaeologists discovered a bronze seal with the official title that the Han government bestowed upon the leader of the Xiongnu. The excavators suggested that these brick chamber tombs all belong to the Xiongnu (Qinghai 1993)."Classifications of these burial sites make distinction between two prevailing type of burials: "(1) monumental ramped terrace tombs which are often flanked by smaller "satellite" burials and (2) 'circular' or 'ring' burials."
According to Rogers & Kaestle (2022), these studies make clear that the Xiongnu population is extremely similar to the preceding Slab Grave population, which had a similar frequency of Eastern and Western maternal haplogroups, supporting a hypothesis of continuity from the Slab Grave period to the Xiongnu. They wrote that the bulk of the genetics research indicates that roughly 27% of Xiongnu maternal haplogroups were of West Eurasian origin, while the rest were East Asian. " The first pattern is that the slab burial mtDNA frequencies are extremely similar to those of the aggregated Xiongnu populations and relatively similar to those of the various Bronze Age Mongolian populations, strongly supporting a population continuity hypothesis for the region over these time periods (Honeychurch, 2013)"
Some examples of maternal haplogroups observed in Xiongnu specimens include D4b2b4, N9a2a, G3a3, D4a6 and D4b2b2b. and U2e1.
Some examples of paternal haplogroups in Xiongnu specimens include Q1b, (Poster abstracts p. 235; 2041F) (Journal: 西部考古 Archaeology) C3, R1, R1b, O3a and O3a3b2, R1a1a1b2a-Z94, R1a1a1b2a2-Z2124, Q1a, N1a, J2a, J1a and E1b1b1a.
According to Lee & Kuang, the main paternal lineages of 62 Xiongnu Elite remains in the Egiin Gol valley belonged to the paternal haplogroups N1c1, Q-M242, and C-M217. One sample from Duurlig Nars belonged to R1a1 and another to C-M217. Xiongnu remains from Barkol belonged exclusively to haplogroup Q. They argue that the haplogroups C2, Q and N likely formed the major paternal haplogroups of the Xiongnu tribes, while R1a was the most common paternal haplogroup (44.5%) among neighbouring nomads from the Altai mountain, who were probably incorporated into the Xiongnu confederation and may be associated with the Jie people.
A genetic study published in Nature in May 2018 examined the remains of five Xiongnu. The study concluded that Xiongnu confederation was genetically heterogeneous, and Xiongnu individuals belonging to two distinct groups, one being of primarily East Asian origin (associated with the earlier Slab-grave culture) and the other presenting considerable admixture levels with West Eurasian (possibly from Central Saka) sources. The evidence suggested that the Huns probably emerged through minor male-driven geneflow into the Saka through westward migrations of the Xiongnu.: "Principal Component Analyses and D-statistics suggest that the Xiongnu individuals belong to two distinct groups, one being of East Asian origin and the other presenting considerable admixture levels with West Eurasian sources... We find that Central Sakas are accepted as a source for these 'western-admixed' Xiongnu in a single-wave model. In line with this finding, no East Asian gene flow is detected compared to Central Sakas as these form a clade with respect to the East Asian Xiongnu in a D-statistic, and furthermore, cluster closely together in the PCA (Figure 2)... Overall, our data show that the Xiongnu confederation was genetically heterogeneous, and that the Huns emerged following minor male-driven East Asian gene flow into the preceding Sakas that they invaded... As such our results support the contention that the disappearance of the Inner Asian Scythians and Sakas around two thousand years ago was a cultural transition that coincided with the westward migration of the Xiongnu. This Xiongnu invasion also led to the displacement of isolated remnant groups—related to Late Bronze Age pastoralists—that had remained on the south-eastern side of the Tian Shan mountains."
A study published in November 2020 examined 60 early and late Xiongnu individuals from across Mongolia. The study found that the Xiongnu resulted from the admixture of three different clusters from the Mongolian region. The two early genetic clusters are "early Xiongnu_west" from the Altai Mountains (formed at 92% by the hybrid Eurasian Chandman ancestry, and 8% BMAC ancestry), and "early Xiongnu_rest" from the Plateau (individuals with primarily Ulaanzuukh-Slab Grave ancestry, or mixed with "early Xiongnu_west"). The later third cluster named "late Xiongnu" has even higher heterogenity, with the continued combination of Chandman and Ulaanzuukh-Slab Grave ancestry, and additional geneflow from Sarmatian and Han Chinese sources. Their uniparental haplogroup assignments also showed heterogenetic influence on their ethnogenesis as well as their connection with Huns. Text was copied from this source, which is available under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. In contrast, the later Mongol Empire had a much higher eastern Eurasian ancestry as a whole, similar to that of modern-day Mongolic-speaking populations.
A Xiongnu remain (GD1-4) analysed in a 2024 study was found to be entirely derived from Ancient Northeast Asians without any West Eurasian-associated ancestry. The sample clustered closely with a Göktürk remain (GD1-1) from the later Turkic period.
On the contrary, high status Xiongnu individuals tended to have less genetic diversity, and their ancestry was essentially derived from the Eastern Eurasian Ulaanzuukh/Slab Grave culture, or alternatively from the Xianbei, suggesting multiple sources for their Eastern ancestry. High Eastern ancestry was more common among high status female samples, while low status male samples tended to be more diverse and having higher Western ancestry. A likely chanyu, a male ruler of the Empire identified by his prestigious tomb, was shown to have had similar ancestry as a high status female in the "western frontiers", deriving about 39.3% Slab Grave (or Ancient Northeast Asian) genetic ancestry, 51.9% Han people (or Yellow River farmers) ancestry, with the rest (8.8%) being Saka (Chandman culture) ancestry.
Xiongnu art is harder to distinguish from Saka or Scythian art. There is a similarity present in stylistic execution, but Xiongnu art and Saka art often differ in terms of iconography. Saka art does not appear to have included predation scenes, especially with dead prey, or same-animal combat. Additionally, Saka art included elements not common to Xiongnu iconography, such as winged, horned horses. The two cultures also used two different kinds of bird heads. Xiongnu depictions of birds tend to have a medium-sized eye and beak, and they are also depicted with ears, while Saka birds have a pronounced eye and beak, and no ears. Some scholars claim these differences are indicative of cultural differences. Scholar Sophia-Karin Psarras suggests that Xiongnu images of animal predation, specifically tiger-and-prey, are a spiritual representation of death and rebirth, and that same-animal combat is representative of the acquisition or maintenance of power.
Chinese sources indicate that the Xiongnu did not have an ideographic form of writing like Chinese, but in the 2nd century BC, a renegade Chinese dignitary Yue "taught the Shanyu to write official letters to the Chinese court on a wooden tablet long, and to use a seal and large-sized folder." The same sources tell that when the Xiongnu noted down something or transmitted a message, they made cuts on a piece of wood ('ke-mu'), and they also mention a "Hu script" (vol. 110). At Noin-Ula and other Xiongnu burial sites in Mongolia and the region north of Lake Baikal, among the objects discovered during excavations conducted in 1924 and 1925 were over 20 carved characters. Most of these characters are either identical or very similar to letters of the Old Turkic alphabet of the Early Middle Ages found on the Eurasian steppes. From this, some specialists conclude that the Xiongnu used a script similar to the ancient Eurasian runiform, and that this alphabet was a basis for later Turkic writing.
Historical evidence gives reason to believe that, from the 2nd century BC, proto-Mongol peoples (the Xiongnu, Xianbei, and Khitan people) were familiar with Buddhism. Remains of Buddhist prayer beads were found in a Xiongnu grave in Ivolginsky District.Александр Берзин, Тибетский буддизм: история и перспективы развития, M., 1992 (Alexandr Berzin, Tibetan Buddhism: History and Future Prospects, Moscow 1992; Буддизм, Л. Л. Абаева, М., Республика, 1991 ( Buddhism, L.L. Abaeva, Respublika, Moscow 1991)
target="_blank" rel="nofollow"> "Settlement Patterns and Domestic Economy of the Xiongnu in Khanui Valley, Mongolia" , 137–152. In Xiongnu Archaeology: Multidisciplinary Perspectives of the First Steppe Empire in Inner Asia''.
|
|
