Are huge organised migrations of hundreds of thousands of people (at once, obviously) in ancient and medieval times a thing or they're just exaggerations of contemporaries?
Pic is just to illustrate, don't turn this into modern migrants "discussion", please.
Other urls found in this thread:
en.m.wikipedia.org
twitter.com
This thread won't end well
All those women and children...
Gothic War (376–382)
good question. you tell me. can you post some documented times when it was massive? ive always felt that technology makes a differences in immigration but i think for this middle eastern syrian stuff, it really doesnt
yes but there were larger proportions of women and children
Haven't you ever played Rome: Barbarian Invasion? Fuckers are unstoppable. Also I think back in Caesar's day some mass migrations were attempted but Caesar genocided them all.
Wars have always resulted in large migrations, the best example being the crisis of the 4th and 5th centuries in Europe, but the many devastating wars in China have resulted in large migrations
look at all these poor starving women and children displaced due to their homes being destroyed by tyrannical governments and terrorists! look at all the future doctors and engineers in that crowd! we must take as many as we can. forget borders and shit, this is human rights
>Are huge organised migrations of hundreds of thousands of people (at once, obviously) in ancient and medieval times a thing or they're just exaggerations of contemporaries?
Half of Europe got Slav´d in like two centuries, so I wouldn´t exactely call the migrations exaggerated.
Perhaps it would be a better comparison if you think about it relative to population sizes.
Yes they've always been a thing usually engineered intentionally to destroy the hosts. It was standard practice to massacre towns and cities around castles before laying siege to it so that hundreds or thousands of people would seek refuge with their lords and either be turned away/massacred(genuinely common) and join the invading forces or end the Castle 3 year supplies in a month.
See: Gothic migration into Rome, 376. Most modern estimates put the total number of immigrants at around 100,000.
>Pic is just to illustrate
Assuming you're looking for parallels between past events and what's currently happening in Europe, there are plenty. Hopefully the next part doesn't repeat itself:
See helveti migration.
got sources on that?
Sounds quite smart, but weren't castles kind of made for protection of surrounding population?
Mass immigration is a biological weapon directed against the host population, who would have thought? But NOT the current """Syrian""" refugee crisis, of course! Europeans must help those poor refugee women and children like the pic in the OP!
Castles usually had a surrounding wall, an outer keep, and an inner keep. Under siege the essential villagers are given access to the outer keep where they can continue farming and producing for the inner keep but if that level falls only the most essential farmers are allowed into the inner keep where they can barely produce enough to feed the inhabitants of the castle and no one else. If the outer keep gets overrun it's only a matter of time before resources run out in the inner keep. At this point most villagers will have fled, been slaughtered, or joined the sieging army.
Friendly warning:
>Pic is just to illustrate, don't turn this into modern migrants "discussion", please.
>joined the sieging army
How common was that? Sounds more likely that the peasants would just run away, unless they are really butthurt about the Lord.
Not very, as they would then need to be equipped with gear and weapons that the sieging army would have to give them, plus it would be more mouths to feed but if the peasants had some training or use for the attacking army they might be allowed in. You're right most peasants would just run away but the question is to where and then what do they do to survive
Yes my source is By Sword and Fire: Cruelty and Atrocity in Medieval Warfare by Sean McGlynn.
Fun read. Especially the opening chapters about Medieval justice.
Thanks
There was a lot more wrong with the Roman state then just the migrations that resulted in its downfall, so don't worry about it getting as bad as that.
Yew. Slavic people represent! Whoop whoop!
After the reconquista muslim migration away.
After the fall of constantinople.
The Goths in Rome.
In recent times you can see exchange of population between India and Pakistan, which I think is the largest in history.
Neither will the countries where these scums will arrive
They were obviously not as massive since the world's population was much lower even just two or three centuries ago and it's debatable how organised they were but migrations have occured throughout history. You have the migrations of the various Siberian, SEA and Pacific groups into the Americas, the Bantu migrations towards the south, the many migrations into Europe before the Indo-Europeans, several waves of migrations of the first Indo-European (the Celtic, Italic, Greek etc) and then the great migrations when you see the mass movement of Germanic, Slavic, Iranic, Turkic tribes towards Europe.
Yes, but political and radicalized scholars try to downplay such ancient migrations because it would be uncomfortable for their world views. So they claim, for example, that the spread of Indo-European languages wasn't through conquest and migration, but through trade and assimilation.
It was a combination of both, though
The ethnic cleansing of Germans living outside of the truncated borders of the two Germanies post-World War 2 (1945-1950) was probably the largest forced migration in history, killing 3 million or so civilians.
Just pick up the Bible, forcing migration of conquered peoples was a common method in the past at subjugation by eliminating their link to their land, hence why the Jews were moved to Babylon after numerous revolts.
Maybe it's time to take a second look at some cesarean strategies
I'd say Hoomer's Iliad had intresting things related to current events.