Bleda The Hun
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: All Empires Community
Forum Name: Historical Amusement
Forum Discription: For role playing and alternative history discussions.
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=21118
Printed Date: 17-Jun-2024 at 11:09
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Bleda The Hun
Posted By: Penelope
Subject: Bleda The Hun
Date Posted: 09-Aug-2007 at 02:18
| What if Bleda had ruled, instead of Atilla? Would he had been as much of a "scourge of god" as his brother? |
Replies:
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 09-Aug-2007 at 11:08
|
He might have been, he seemed as ambitious though a bit reserved, he seemed to have respected treaties just a bit more than Atilla, altough he still would have exacted heavy tribute, and may have followed his uncle's example of heavy tribute, and border skirmishes, and raiding.
------------- |
Posted By: Penelope
Date Posted: 09-Aug-2007 at 22:59
I agree. He did appear to have more respect for treaties, which definatly shows that he may not have been as "blood thirsty" as some percieve him to be. He also gives us the impression, that though he was the Older of the two, he was a bit "submissive" to Attila. Which in turn, could also be ONE of the reasons why Rugila, before his death, had them both crowned, instead of just Bleda, who in fact, was the legitimate successor.
|
Posted By: Patch
Date Posted: 10-Aug-2007 at 02:51
|
Without Attila they is a distint possibility that the WRE could have lasted significantly longer.
For example the planned attempt to retake North Africa would have gone ahead and if successful would have greatly increased the rescources available to the Romans. Possibly enabling them, with the support of the ERE, to confront the Goths and Franks within their borders.
|
Posted By: Penelope
Date Posted: 10-Aug-2007 at 04:32
Yes, but do you think Bleda woudve been capable of weakening Rome as well?
|
Posted By: Balain d Ibelin
Date Posted: 10-Aug-2007 at 20:39
|
Bleda maybe capable to handle and do that, but she must ally with the Germannic Tribes to do a "Scourge of God" as horrible as his brother did. ------------- "Good quality will be known among your enemies, before you ever met them my friend"Trobadourre de Crusadier Crux |
Posted By: Penelope
Date Posted: 10-Aug-2007 at 23:00
Yes, he was definately capable of being a "scourge". Many people wonder if he would have managed the incredibly vast Hunnic Empire in a more sufficient manner, than his brother. For example, when Attila defeated Arnegisclus, and over-ran all of the Balkans, stopping at Thermopylae, "there were so many blood-lettings, that the dead could not be numbered." He had sacked churches, and monasteries, reportedly killed all of the monks, and many women.
Now...would Bleda have sacked the churches and monasteries as well, and killed the monks?
|
Posted By: Knights
Date Posted: 10-Aug-2007 at 23:31
|
I'm not sure, we don't have a very complete description of Bleda, and thus don't know whether he would have taken the same path as Attila. I couldn't give a good answer either. The ‘Scourge’ was
an Ancient Roman type of whip, designed to inflict the most damage and
pain possible on the victim. Attila dubbed himself with the sobriquet, “Scourge of God”,
as he believed himself to be "God’s whip" to inflict as much pain and
damage to the Western and Eastern Roman Empires as possible. Whether Bleda had intentions to attack the WRE is unknown to an extent. Attila made many fatal mistakes, and if Bleda had've been in the position and not made similar errors, the WRE could have expired 20 years earlier than it did...
------------- |
Posted By: Penelope
Date Posted: 10-Aug-2007 at 23:45
That is very well put, and fair enough. I actually had no idea that Attila dubbed Himself that.
And i would finally like to say, that Rugila The Great, uniter of the tribes, should also be credited, since he "gave birth" to both Bleda and Attila lol. |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 11-Aug-2007 at 01:49
|
From what I know he seems more calm, and rational, he supported the politics of the day, i.e. the raiding, and the tribute collections from both the Western, and Eastern Empire among others. Attila seemed too impatient for such safe, and sure prosperous enterprises', and rather liked conueror's path to ensure the virility of his realm. Their uncle, and as seems Bleda prefered that concrete path, unlike Attila. Therefore, to me it seems that he would have been a tough opponent for Rome, nevertheless, he would have preferred his tributes than going to claim his rights to the Emperor's sisters hand in marriage.
------------- |
Posted By: Knights
Date Posted: 11-Aug-2007 at 02:38
Rugila, was he Attila/Bleda's predecessor? I can't remember if he was their father, or their predecessor...Rua comes to mind. Anyway, I get your drift about him "giving birth"  to the two. I believe that Attila's greatest achievement was centralising Hunnic authority and administration, by laying the stones for a capital, and uniting the numerous Hunnic tribes to an extent unseen before him. ------------- |
Posted By: Penelope
Date Posted: 11-Aug-2007 at 02:40
I agree 100%. I also do not think that Bleda would have claim the rights to the entire West, just becuase he was offered a marriage.
|
Posted By: Knights
Date Posted: 11-Aug-2007 at 02:44
|
The thing is, would Bleda have taken that initial step and assassinated Attila (or had him assassinated), in order to attain sole rule? Personally, I think they could have achieved the most working in unison against the WRE, and even brought it down completely. Who knows...
------------- |
Posted By: Penelope
Date Posted: 11-Aug-2007 at 03:12
Yes, Rugila The Great was the uncle of the two, and creater of the empire. He had them both crowned before his death. Even though Bleda, by himself, was the actual legitimate successor, becuase he was the older of the two.
And Knights, i do believe that both Attila and Bleda together, would have had enough capability to conquer the entire planet, had they stuck together, and remained The Two Kings of the Hunnic Empire.
|
Posted By: Knights
Date Posted: 11-Aug-2007 at 03:22
Maybe a bittt of a hyberbole...seeing as even Genghis and his dogs of war didn't even achieve that. But Nevertheless, the Huns would have been a force to reckon with to both the WRE and ERE if Bleda and Attila had campaigned in unison. Another huge mistake Attila made was not making full use of Geiseric. Not even allying or scheming against the common enemy, the WRE, was a mistake that's implications should not be overlooked - Attila and Geiseric could have whooped the WRE!  But in all seriousness, purely by remedying some of the mishaps of Attila, Bleda/Attila and Bleda, might have dramatically changed the course of history... ------------- |
Posted By: Penelope
Date Posted: 11-Aug-2007 at 03:31
I agree. And people should also take into consideration, that the mistakes that Attlila made during his reign, were astronomical. Any other nation on earth at that time, making the same mistakes, wouldve been completely destroyed immediatly. The Hunnic Empire shouldve been able to last.
|
Posted By: Knights
Date Posted: 11-Aug-2007 at 03:46
|
Very true Penelope. Regardless, it was nothing compared to the misjudgment, disorganisation and consequent failure of Attila's successors. See: http://www.allempires.com/article/index.php?q=Attila_the_Hun_The_Scourge_of_God_-_Demonic_ - http://www.allempires.com/article/index.php?q=Attila_the_Hun_The_Scourge_of_God_-_Demonic_ Should provide some further insight into the matter (not on Bleda though). ------------- |
Posted By: Penelope
Date Posted: 03-Nov-2007 at 05:15
Thanks Knights. The article ROCKS!
|
Posted By: Knights
Date Posted: 05-Nov-2007 at 09:15
Aw thanks.  I wrote it for Ancient History class at school. Didn't end up doing too bad in the end, so I'm happy. I had to take a bit of a risk in some of the things I said against Attila, but I was willing to take them.  If only Bleda was in that position...the possibilities...
------------- |
Posted By: Hungo
Date Posted: 23-Mar-2009 at 14:18
|
Attila and Bleda (actually its Buda) were close brothers in good relationship. No fight between them, Attila didnt kill Buda as some western historicals claim.. As the Huns, Magyars, Scythians, had dual rulership. Attial was leader of the army, he was the hysical power of the Hun empire, while Buda was teh spiritual leader of the people. Thats how the balance is kept. little off topic: There are 2 common versions of Attila death. Attila was not killed by her wife, and not died in bleeding nose by drinking wine. Even teh greek Priscos rhetor wrote down that Attila was drinking much anytime. He was far more wise leader than get ddrunk on any occasion. Attila was assasinated in a pact of the Western and Eastern Roman empire. ------------- Attila király katonája |
Posted By: Penelope
Date Posted: 23-Mar-2009 at 21:16
That is some very interesting information there. ------------- The direct use of force is such a poor solution to any problem, it is generally employed only by small children and large nations. |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 23-Mar-2009 at 21:39
------------- |
Posted By: Hungo
Date Posted: 24-Mar-2009 at 21:24
Search about Priscos rhetor, he was living Attila's camp for many ears, and he had the opportunity to look close on the life of the Huns. ------------- Attila király katonája |
Posted By: Hungo
Date Posted: 24-Mar-2009 at 21:30
|
I wouldgive you sources, but most of these books are in hungarian, and i dont know you bear this language or not. both the western and eastern roman empire wasnt capable to hold back the Hun empire. THe best idea was murder the symbol of the empire, Attila.The trick worked well, none of his 5 sons could control a big empire as Attila could. I have a good book about Attila's life, maybe i try totranslate two articles, oen about is death other is about his empire&army sizes. * i had a mistake in the first post: little off topic: There are 2 common versions of Attila death. Attila was not killed by her wife, and not died in bleeding nose by drinking wine. Even the greek Priscos rhetor wrote down that Attila was NOT drinking much anytime. (, i missed the n'not' world. Yes he lived sober life.) goodnight ------------- Attila király katonája |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 25-Mar-2009 at 19:02
|
Oh no not about the assasination that part made sense, I would rather have an explanation for such a shall we say "heavenly" view of Attila and Bleda. Seems a bit biased if you excuse my doubts. ------------- |