I think "Attila" is an emperor of the Hun Empire that rose up to stop advances/expansion of the Roman Empire into Central and Easter Europe. To the "local" inhabitants, Attila was a true and courageous leader of the land. The Romans were invaders and destroyers. The Roman won.
But history is often like that --written by and praising the victors while the losers became villains and dehumanised. But as a study --a search for truth-- facts should be looked at in neutrality or as they were/are --no colouring, nor sensationalising, nor dressing of any kind.
I think "Attila" is an emperor of the Hun Empire that rose up to stop advances/expansion of the Roman Empire into Central and Easter Europe. To the "local" inhabitants, Attila was a true and courageous leader of the land. The Romans were invaders and destroyers. The Roman won.
But history is often like that --written by and praising the victors while the losers became villains and dehumanised. But as a study --a search for truth-- facts should be looked at in neutrality or as they were/are --no colouring, nor sensationalising, nor dressing of any kind.