Customer Reviews

Biography - Attila [VHS]

5 star:		(2)
4 star:		(0)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

I, Jesse Sublett, am the writer of this documentary, ATTILA THE HUN: SCOURGE OF GOD. I did all of the research, sought out historical consultants, wrote the interview questions, wrote the narrative script, and edited the historical consultants comments which were used in the final cut of the documentary. I am very proud of the finished product and stand on its accuracy, and therefore would like to respond to the bizarre, misinformed and completely erroneous "review" posted here by Charles King, regarding this documentary.

First I'd like to address the totally weird comment that I relied upon the book Leadership Secrets of Attila the Hun by Wes Roberts. What a ridiculous statement, besides the fact that if it were true, how would Mr. King know? First of all, I never read that book. I did glance at it so I could refer to the book itself in passing. During the several months I spent researching this subject (not to mention all the time spent by the production staff, fact checkers, historical consultants, and others), I had the good fortune to work with Dr. Stephen Bela Vardy, one of the world's leading experts on Hungarian history and culture, and of the Huns. He was not able to appear on the show, but his reputation and his knowledge of Attila is unassailable (by the way he certainly has been published on the subject), and Dr. Vardy checked and approved every single fact in this documentary.

The treatment of Attila's years spent in Rome is certainly accepted by scholars. Mr. King might want to read the writings of the Greek historian Priscus, who actually met Attila on on at least one occasion. Mr. King might also want to read C.D. Gordon's The Age of Attila, probably one of the best single places to read about Attila and the years he spent in Rome. The tradition of holding a representative of one's enemy hostage for years at a time was common during this time period (which is why Attila was actually in Rome), so one wonders why Mr. King seems so upset by this part of the show, and it is certainly not "pure invention," although with anything from this time period one must consider the sources carefully, check and re-check, and that is what we have done in this case, and our conclusions and our presentation are hardly on the fringe, they are historically accurate and carefully vetted and approved by mainstream academic experts on the highest level. Mr. King is also off the money when he states that it is asserted that Attila's time in Rome was the main reason he went to war against Rome. Attila warred against Rome because he was a warrior, his people needed booty, and because it was there! It is true that when in Rome, he lost whatever respect he might have had for his enemies, because they were decadent and weak. In his criticisms of the documentary's recreations, Mr. King takes on the tone of a crushed schoolboy who has just discovered there is no Santa Claus; it is true, the production could not afford to hire and outfit thousands of re-enactors to stand in for Attila's Huns; the footage of men on horseback is only meant to add a bit of tone and texture to the show. These programs are not made on Steven Spielberg budgets, unfortunately. Archers are in fact in the show, perhaps Mr. King was in the kitchen during that portion of the documentary. I agree that it would have been nice to have a more in-depth demonstration of Hun archery techniques; however, that was not possible due to time constraints. It is very difficult to tell Attila's story in 45 minutes, but I think the choices we made were the right ones. Mr. King says what he "thinks" to be true about our on-camera experts, however, what he "thinks" must be the way he has done the rest of his research, apparently, because our on-screen experts are in fact authorities on the Huns. Perhaps someday Mr. King can make his own documentary and tell the story the way he wants it done. But I doubt he will get credible historians to support his version of the story. And by the way, Mr. King misspelled hilarious.

Though key questions still remain unanswered about this great strategist and politician, "Attila, the Scourge of God" does provide a fresh look at Attila, one of the most dreaded figures in western history. We get some insight into what might have driven him through his breathtaking quests, as well as some clues to his cultural origins. But key questions remain shrouded in doubt. Where was Attila born? How did he come to be an exchange student in Rome? Why did he decide to "take" the Roman Empire? And, the tv version of this video had an intriguing bit at the end: according to the original (?) t.v. version of this A&E video, apparently those who have Hun ancestors bear a tell-tale birth mark on the lower back. Why was this detail, widely accepted as fact of ancestry in European rural areas, left out in the video for sale? It was the mention of that birth mark that for me, effectively tied ancient history to today, because I have seen this blue, diamond shaped mark on a few babies here in America. I never guessed it could be related to anything or any tribe, and in that way "Attila, the Scourge of God" really tickled my imagination.Despite its shortcomings, this is riveting viewing, and suitable for children as young as middle school. (Teachers, it's unlikely they'll be bored!)

i saw this video on A & E the other night and found it interesting. i was looking for some background and history on the "scourge of god" and it delivered - except there weren't a lot of great battle recreations done (but i understand budgets). then i go online to find a book on attila to further my newfound interest in the famous barbarian leader and i come upon this new "attila battle" between the video screen writer and some fella named charles king who is the #1 expert in america on the huns. wow that's impressive. so why can't i find a book by you on attila? hmmmm anyway the video was good and i will look into the books and authors both you boys mention. now why can't we all try to love one another.

This crybaby who claims to be a history professor and self appointed Attila expert, offered his sadly naive and silly opinion of my documentary for Biography on Attila. His main complaint, is that I used the story about Attila being held hostage in Rome as a youth. This practice was quite common in ancient times, and the story has been repeated by numerous credible sources. In his earlier diatribe, the little professor went ballistic and insulted this documentary, claiming that it was fiction and trash because it uses this story. Further, he claimed that I based this information on a motivational book titled The Leadership Secrets of Attila the Hun. This was completely false. All of the facts in the documentary were checked by world renowned Hun expert Professor Stephen Bela Vardy. While it may be true that the story of Attila being a hostage is not verified by ancient sources, Dr. Vardy believes it is true and that is good enough for me. I stated this in my earlier review. Then Mr. King offered another petty and vicious attack on this video and tried to rebut my statements by asserting that a picture of the book in question appears in the credits, and therefore it MUST have been source material. This is a naive and stupid assumption, proving that Mr. King has little or no knowledge of how television productions are made. I live in Austin, Texas currently, and do not frequently visit the production company (Perpetual Motion Pictures, which has produced scores of high quality history documentaries, many of them award winning) during the final stages of the production. One of the video editors decided to include the picture of the book because at the time, H. Ross Perot was in the news a lot. He was running for president, and he was so taken with the Attila leadership book that he bought a huge number of copies and gave them away to associates and employees. Originally, a few lines about this was in the film but they were edited out. Mr. King's outrageous and insulting assertions are all based on this simple misunderstanding. He also attacks the credibility of the experts who appear in the program -- not realizing that I consulted none of these experts in the writing of the script. Also, he provides no qualifications for his own expertise. We must assume then that he is a pompous and bitter blowhard who has nothing better to do than try to attack and tear down the work of others, since he has nothing else to offer.
Once again, I will repeat that this program was vetted by Professor Vardy, who, unlike Mr. King, is published on the subject of the Huns and a world-renowned expert. I think Mr. King should grow up and if he thinks he has anything to offer, perhaps he should try to write his own version of Attila's life and see if any network or producer thinks he has talent for anything besides bitter diatribes.

You can read here the response Jesse Sublett has made to my earlier review, in which I pointed out that much of what is in this documentary is fiction that has no support in ancient sources. As he suggests that I am ignorant, I should point out that I am a specialist on the history of the Huns, and that I have published several works on the subject. There is virtually no one in America who is more familiar with the ancient sources about the Huns than I am.

Although his response is full of bluster and insults, Sublett does not produce any ancient sources to support his position, nor could he, since they do not exist. There are really only two major sources for the life of Attila (Priscus and Jordanes) with small bits of information in other sources (Salvian, Isaac of Antioch, etc) and a few sources on the Huns of other periods (Ammianus, Eunapius).

Mr. Sublett builds his whole explanation of Attila's view of the Romans on the idea that Attila was a hostage in Rome in his youth. Why then is this alleged incident nowhere to be found in ANY ANCIENT SOURCE? Sublett is simply confusing fiction with history, and, if he knows a scholar who told him that story, it only shows that Sublett should have read the ancient sources and checked the facts for himself. Indeed, he could also have read the major modern studies of the subject by E. A. Thompson, Otto Maenchen-Helfen, and Istvan Bona, none of which mention this nonsense about Attila being in Rome in his youth.

There are popular tradions about Attila's life that derive from medieval and early modern folklore, but that is not history, and should not presented as history (which is basically what the film does). There are various modern works in which this popular (but inaccurate) material appears. I mentioned Wes Roberts' book because the version of the documentary that was shown on TV identified that book as a source and even flashed its cover on the screen (!) I have this on tape if anyone doubts me.

The bottom line is that "A&E Biography: Attila the Hun" contains a substantial amount of material that is wrong, unattested by any ancient source, and unmentioned in any major modern study of the Huns. The documentary is therefore a piece of poorly researched junk, passing off legend and fiction as history and seemingly relying on modern hearsay rather than ancient evidence as its primary source of information.

It is hard to imagine how any documentary could be worse than this. The makers of the film seem to have done little more than 30 seconds of research. The main source that the documentary relies on is a book by Wes Roberts called "Leadership Secrets of Attila the Hun." This book is a work of FICTION, not history. Thus, all of the material that the documentary presents about Attila's youth is just total invention, with no support in any ancient source. For example, the film claims that Attila spent time living among the Romans in his youth. This story is completely false, and yet the film presents it as Attila's main motive for his later hostility to Rome! What nonsense! Making matters worse are some hilarius recreations of the Huns at war that ignore everything that is known about Hunnic tactics. The Huns fought as horse-mounted archers, but there is not a bow in sight. One could note too that the scholars who are interviewed in the film are not experts on the Huns, and I don't think any of them has published on the subject. A&E Biography should be embarrassed about offering this ignorant drivel for sale.