> The invasion of the Huns was pretty traumatic for the Western Roman Empire "Traumatic" is quite the understatement. The huns and the hunnic empire destroyed

> The invasion of the Huns was pretty traumatic for the Western Roman Empire "Traumatic" is quite the understatement. The huns and the hunnic empire destroyed the roman empire by ending roman primacy in western/northern europe. And the power balance shifted forever from the south to the north. It was the huns victory over the romans that ultimately allowed the northern germanic tribes to move south and westward. Whereas for a thousand years it was the romans who were pushing north and westward. Without the huns, the anglo-saxons wouldn't be able to invade the british isles and we wouldn't have england. No england, no america. No america, no internet. Oh dear. > and it is possible that if it did not happen, or if the Huns met defeat early, the empire could have limped along for next thousand years, just like the Eastern Empire did. Or maybe it would have galvanized the romans to expand into northern europe once and for all. And we'd have a roman western/northern europe rather than the germanic western/northern europe. It's one of those interesting "what ifs" of history.