Hence, the reasoning runs thus--that the Huns of Attila were what the Huns of Priscus were;--that one of these Hun tribes was the Khazar tribe. What were the Khazars? The Khazars were _Turks from the East_. Τούρκοι ἀπὸ τῆς ἑώας, οὓς Χαζάρας ὀνομάζουσι, Theophanes, the first author who names them, denoting them thus. In respect to their history, the Khazars appear as the Avars wane in importance. It was by an alliance with the Khazars, indeed, that Heraclius, as stated above, freed himself from those formidable enemies. From A.D. 626, until the tenth century, the Khazars and Petchinakhi (Πατζινακῖται) are the most formidable enemies to the Goths of the Crimea, and to the Russians of the Dnieper. If these affiliations be correct, the Turks are one of the oldest material influences that have acted on the history of the world, as well as one of the greatest; the Turk division being the probable ethnological position for the Massagetæ, Sakæ, Cimmerii, Alani, Huns, and Avars, and other less important conquerors. To distribute the still older tribes of Scythia is a matter of _minute_ ethnology, for which the present work will not allow room. The usual notices, however, of the Turk nations, taken from the Chinese records, should not be omitted. _The Hiong-nou._--Under this name a conquering nation, conterminous with China, and against which the Chinese wall had been built, appears in the annals of the dynasty of Han; between B.C. 163 and A.D. 196. These are the Hiong-nou of De Guignes and Gibbon. _The Hiun-yu._--Under the dynasty of Shang, which is supposed to have reigned from B.C. 1766 to B.C. 1234, Klaproth finds notice of a people thus denominated. He considers that they were ancestors of the Hiong-nou. I give these two names for what they have been believed by better judges than myself to denote--not for what I believe myself. The only fact which to me seems incontestible is that, at an early period in the Chinese history, a non-Chinese nation was known under the name of _Hiong-nu_. If these be the Huns of the Classics, the evidence as to their being Turk rather than Hungarian, is nearly conclusive; the Turk division being the only one which is, at one and the same time, conterminous with Europe, and almost conterminous with China. Moreover, if the Hiong-nou be the Huns, we may infer that the name _Hun_ was a native name, in the way that _Deutsche_ is the native name of what we call the _Ger__mans_; since it is not likely that the Greeks and Chinese would use the same appellation, unless it were also the indigenous appellation of the people to which it was applied.[26] _The Thú-kiú._--These are the proper Turks of the Altai mountains under a Chinese name. They are mentioned as being powerful about A.D. 545. 1. If the word _Thú-kiú_ be the Chinese form of _Turk_, we learn that the name was native. 2. If the Hiong-nu and Thú-kiú be the same people, we fix the former as Turk rather than aught else.