Barbarians

When did invasions by barbarian hordes cease to be a legitimate threat to civilized states?

Honestly, only by the late 1800s or so. Russia was still having trouble with steppe nomads until well after modernization under Peter.

barbarians settle down eventually

Hand held firearms vastly changed the power gradient between sedentary cultures and nomadic ones.

Before them, it was extremely hard to deal with horse archers.

The last really big example I can think of where a civilized society was overrun by nomads was the Mogul Conquest of India, although I'm sure some more knowledgeable user will correct me.

>cease

Sometimes I wish we lived in old times. Shit gets too predictable with modernity.

Never. America is probably the greatest threat to civilized states today.

Enjoy your smallpox, I guess.

America is not barbarians, America is empire.

America forces all women in the world to behave like barbarians.

when the global footprint of a civilized citizen stops being bigger than a barbarian one

meaning, the barbarian will not have to leave its home to live under normal conditions

Muslim barbarians are threatening Europe as we speak.

The Mongols were an empire.

I guess the Qing conquest of China in the 1600s was the last successful large-scale barbarian invasion of a civilized country. After that, it was mostly "civilized" countries who invaded "barbarians".

Sure we are really afraid of 1%-2% Muslims.

kek nice try ivan

>Late 1800s
Nope.jpg

The Great Khanates stopped being a thing due to the sheer force of the double penetration Romanov Russia and Qing China were giving the Steppe Peoples.

When the Dzungars were genocided by the Chinese in the 18th Century, that was it, Steppenigger barbarians ceased being a problem. Sure banditry was still rife but that was the end of the great nomadic empires and confederacies.

>1% -2% muslims in the future

Mostly down to mobilisation numbers.


For most of history steppe groups could mobilise a far higher percentage of their population and get them to where the action would be and be able to feed them (and get away if the numbers werent in their favour). Settled groups had a harder time mobilising their population in general, combine that with having to get them to action and then feed them when they were there so Kings and stuff had to get 'just enough' men to the battle to win but not so much that they couldnt feed them, pay them or harm the harvest (etc)

18th Century is when they stopped being a threat.

>Manchu
>Barbarians
Haha no. They were a non-Han Chinese minority who revolted from the Ming Dynasty in 1616, and came back to invade China when the Ming Dynasty collapsed in the 1640s. As such, they were pretty civilized actually: they lived in cities, had a working bureaucracy even before the Qing.

They were totally not a "Barbarian Nomad invading China" scenario. The close equivalent would be like of the Ly family of Vietnam- after having revolted successfully from Song Dynasty China- came back and invaded the place and became rulers of China.

This kinda desu. My previous answer would have been with the adoption of guns and the reaching north of civilisation into more hostile kinds of nature due to technological improvement, but barbarians, people who do not have a civilisation and don't care to behave in a way that maintains existing ones, exist now. All they need to spring into existence is weakness here.

*is a lack of civilisation here

As far as "Barbarian Invasions" go this is the most pathetic.

And if this consists of barbarian invasion for some people that is even more pathetic.

Never, they were peace-loving immigrants.