Were The Romans Justified In Calling The Huns Barbaric?

To what extent were the Romans justified in calling the Huns barbaric?
The Huns were a fearsome society, conquering land and allying with and fighting against the Romans at separate times in their history. They were successful in defeating the Romans in numerous battles and Attila is one of the most recognisable names from history. Despite this, they are still considered to be a barbaric society by many in the modern era and most in the ancient era. The criteria to judge whether a society can be called a civilisation are that the society has advanced cities, specialised workers, complex institutions, record keeping and advanced technology. Although the Romans wouldn’t have had a concept of civilisation, as the word emerged in France in the
They had no cities or even towns, preferring to roam and avoiding houses entirely as suggested by Ammianus Marcellinus; ‘They never shelter themselves under roofed houses, but avoid them’ . The Huns did not plough land. They did raise animals, however, they were not kept in one place or domesticated, instead driving them forward to the next destination. The Huns also had no developed form of government or religion. Before Attila took control of the tribes the Huns would conduct councils on horseback ‘contended with the irregular government of their nobles’ . This source shows that the Huns did have nobles, hinting at social classes and specialised workers, however, the social classes were flexible and the jobs for workers, limited. Anyone showing leadership could be brought into the noble class and any slaves kept by the Huns could marry into the families that owned them. Those appointed to be judges within their society were men who had proved themselves in experience and skill through war. The Huns did have spiritual practises, plunging a sword into the ground and performing ceremonies around it and using twigs to predict the future but nothing so complex as the Roman gods and religion. While the Huns did show evidence of some practise similar to those of the Romans, they appeared nowhere near as complex. The Huns also lacked the large cities, marking them as ‘civilised’ and this along with the fluidity and lack of stability in government, social classing, specialised workers, and religion would have easily allowed the Romans to mark them as