the Huns might be thus identified, and has written the history from
Chinese sources, of those who since that time have poured down upon
the civilized countries of Asia and Europe and wasted them. Boulger
also identifies these tribes with the Huns of Attila. After driving
the Alani across the Danube and compelling them to seek an asylum
within the borders of the Roman Empire, the terrible Huns had
halted in their march westward for something more than a
generation. They were hovering, meantime, on the eastern frontiers
of the empire, "taking part like other barbarians in its
disturbances and alliances." Emperors paid them tribute, and Roman
generals kept up a politic or a questionable correspondence with
them. Stilicho had detachments of Huns in the armies which fought
against Alaric, King of the Goths, the greatest Roman soldier after
Stilicho--and, like Stilicho, of barbarian parentage--Aetius, who
was to be their most formidable antagonist, had been a hostage and
messmate in their camps. All historians agree that the influx of
these barbaric peoples hastened, more than any other cause, the
rapid decline of the great empire which the Romans had built up.

About A.D. 433 Attila, equally famous in history and legend, became
the King of the Huns. The attraction of his daring character, and
of his genius for the war which nomadic tribes delight in, gave him
absolute ascendency over his nation, and over the Teutonic and
Slavonic tribes near him. Like other conquerors of his race he
imagined and attempted an empire of ravage and desolation, a vast
hunting ground and preserve, in which men and their works should
supply the objects and zest of the chase.

The gradual encroachments of the Huns on the northern frontiers of
the Roman domain led to a terrific war in 441. Attila was king. His