Here I will quickly present you why there is a such thing as perfect tense and why there is a distinction between she/he and it.

Perfect Tense:

I don't think there was any plausable explanation for this. Although to native speakers it may sound normal as they used to it but it was obvisously waiting for resolution. Probably Have is used to imply overcoming of the authority.  “I have had” probably were used to refer things that done without consent of Lord. "have got" is also similar. Got it similar to God, used to refer authority. It simply and literally means I overcome the authority. Rest of the sentence is like another sentence. Had and hide sound similar although I have no idea. Had may be head. It is not easy to draw explicit lines between words but Perfect Tense things explains it all anyways so. It seems like sounds are more preserved in Scandinavian languages so picture is clearer. Probably the way of talking become habit and they couldn't help themselves speaking this was because the normal way of talking was totally associated with taking orders. Got/good? Perfect. No future tense. Expectos Commandes.

He/She and It:

Pronouns like He/She popped up in many instance probably were to replace pronouns like "it" because association with slavery. (Similar to LBGT today) One of the most prevalent one is Hun/Han. Also most likely origins of names like John and Hans (Original Turkish word was probably Oğun or maybe Oğan. Yoğan would be same since Y drop from beginning of the word is standard in Turkish. Actually same root as Yogurt and Turkish Yok: non-existent. Yoğun means dense. Although I haven't fully figure out yet. Turkish roots and suffixes have semantics way beyond what have been known. Turkish peope have been deriving and using words with this semantic without even being aware. Even the word origin probably of Turkish origin of this root. For instance yor-mak verb used to refer origin of an event or cause of a situation. Consider word Vortex. Just like sound Yoğurt-eks.). In this context Attila was given the name “Attila the Hun” because association with freedom. Han is pretty prevalent throughout the word (Probably most common word) although I am not sure anybody have had any idea why. For instance Chinese call themselves Han Chinese. It seems like this was like a title in some Scandinavian languages later became a pronoun. Only Turkish can explain different derivation of name Oğun/John. Like Hans and Hansel are probably equal to Turkish Oğuz (Hans) and Oğuzal = Özal (Hansel). 

Also dominant blond (rather non-black) hair within Germans and Scandinavians scientifically proves extent of slavery because under normal conditions this is not possible without infanticide. Babies with blonde hair prefferred over black ones. Also it worth to note that this practice is possible origin of common genetic trait where babies had hairs with yellowish colour that turns darker later. (But this is probably more of ancient thing. Baptism is possibly relates to event when they decide whether baby lives or dies. Alcohol or other chemicals possibly used to leach out blonde/reddish pigments and highlights more stable pigment melanin. Or also possibly to check for dyes. This development probably helped to overcome forementioned genetic trait.) Like I said this siutation is genetically not possible under normal conditions and result of selective killing thus it probably didn't take long. Coloured eyes also obviously increased chance of survival. (Or rather decreased chance of elimination.) This was probably mostly about population control. Colors were just used to prefer who will live. It wasn't probably directly to have only blonde slaves rather it was just preference.

There is a clear sign of systematic obfuscation. Those words could be older but there isn’t even much information about Huns. It is very likely that this was organized.
I come to realize this when I was thinking in more general. And wanted to publish this separately. Although it seems like worthless effort considering how crazy is this that nobody knows about this.
This is very important for me because it has a lot of general implication which will make people more critique in general. And I think this is mostly very obvious. Even though sounds are slightly changed in many languages “Han” is still used as it is in most languages. And the name called for Attila singlehandedly explains much even though almost every bit of information related to him and Huns potentially systematicall destoryed. “Attila the Hun”.

(Possibly. Terms like Hun/Han originally derives from Turkish root "o". Today turkish "on-lar" means them but he/she is directly "o". His : "On-un". Hun is probably equivalent of modern Turkish Onun (means his/hers/its). Actually O(ğ)un. If Europeans were try to pronounce it they would pronounce pretty much like Hon/Han. From this root for instance verb on-ar derives. Although used to mean repair/fix possibly same as English Honour. English Honour is pretty ambigous term. When interpreted using Turkish root it can relate to save from associateds/to being belong. Like "honor him" makes pretty sense when evaluated like this.)

(It is another possibly for Germanic "he" is that it has been reverse engineered from Hun by removing Turkish suffix -n that indicated belonging. Potentially Huns were referring themselves as Oğun to imply belonging to Creator. Thus this is also possibly connected to One/Ein. Home: Place where united. Just like persian hane where han refers to singularity. -e is Turkish directional suffix. In this instance undirectly used to make it a place. Because it is mostly used with places so associated with places. Used to make this word Hom-e or Persian Han-e. For instance if you add this suffix to Turkish word for happiness it would make it mean to be happy.)

(German and Scandinavian languages uses Han/Hun to refer roaster. This is obviously because Huns were carrying something like helmet with some kind of projection. Atilla's helmet probably had a special projection maybe even something like a cross and probably created illusion of hanging and probably this resulted in artifacts in European history later.)