3rd–4th century AD). They stated that Xunyu (獯鬻) or Xianyun were terms that designated nomadic people who later during the Han dynasty were transcribed as "Xiongnu" (匈奴). This view was also held by the Tang dynasty commentator Sima Zhen (c. 8th century). Wang Guowei (1877–1927), as a result of phonetical studies and comparisons based on the inscriptions on bronze and the structure of the characters, came to the conclusion that the tribal names "Guifang" (鬼方), "Xunyu" (獯鬻), "Xianyu" (鮮虞), "Xianyun", "Rong" (戎), "Di" (狄), and "Hu" (胡) given in the annals designated one and the same people, who later entered history under the name Xiongnu. The exact time period when the nomads' ethnonym had the Old Chinese phonetizations ancestral to standard Chinese Xianyun remains determined only vaguely. Using the Bronze Inscriptions and Classic of Poetry, Sinologist Axel Schuessler posited the date of 780 BCE. Using Sima Qian's Shiji and other sources, Vsevolod Taskin concludes that in the earlier pre-historic period (during the time of legendary Yellow Emperor) the Xiongnu were called 葷粥 Hunyu, in the late pre-historic period (during the time of legendary Emperor Yao and Emperor Shun) they were called 戎 Rong, in the literate period starting with the Shang dynasty (1600–1046 BC) they were called 鬼方 Guifang, in the Zhou period (1045–256 BC) they were called 獫狁 Xianyun, starting from the Qin period (221–206 BC) the Chinese annalists called them 匈奴 Xiongnu. Even so, Paul R. Goldin (2011) reconstructs the Old Chinese pronunciations of 葷粥 ~ 獯鬻 ~ 獯鬻 ~ 薰育 as *xur-luk, 獫狁 as hram′-lun′, and 匈奴 as *xoŋ-NA; and comments all three names are "manifestly unrelated". He further states that sound changes made the names more superficially similar than they really had been, and prompted later historians and commentators to conclude that those names must have referred to one same people in different epochs, even though people during the Warring States period would never have been thus misled. Li Feng (2006) characterizes Wang Guowei's argument as "essentially deductive" and not based on solid evidence. Following Pulleyblank (1983), Li rejects the identification of the Xianyun with the Xiongnu, and only accepts identification of the Xianyun as one of the 戎 Rong "warlike foreigner" groups. Li proposes that the Xianyun were indigenous hunters, farmers, and pastoralists living in widely distributed communities in the "Northern Zone Complex" in the region stretching from the Yellow River's Ordos Loop to its