Philjames100
Regular Member
- Messages
- 309
- Reaction score
- 130
- Points
- 43
I don't even know how to respond to this 'goddam steppe brutes!' thread.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Blaming the fall of the Western Roman Empire entirely to the Germanic tribes isn‘t completely correct. Some historians say that moral decay, the male Roman population becoming lazy and diseases weakened the Empire. So, Rome was in decline before the Germanics sounded the death kneel, gave the final blow to it. The thing is, that at one point, the empire was split into Western and Eastern empires. And the center of the Empire was not Rome anymore but Constantinople. So, the center of the Empire moved to the East, thus all the money, funds, innovation, and relevance, too. This move made the Western Empire a nonpriority and there wasn‘t much investment in that part of the Empire, thus its development started stagnating. Keep in mind that Germanic tribespeople became the bulk of the soldiers/mercenaries in West Rome. They were fighting against other German barbarians to stop their invasion and to secure the border. So, Germanic tribes made sure that the Western Empire didn‘t collapse earlier than it did. Furthermore, the Goths were not that destructive. The Vandals were, but they were outmatched by the Huns. To Romans, the Huns were the most savage of the savages.
The bottom line is, that Rome had many issues. Eastern Rome became more important than the Western part. Hence, West Rome was pretty abandoned, lacked funds, and wasn‘t well-governed. Due to the lack of funds, the empire was unable to maintain its massive landholdings, and invading forces began to conquer them slowly, over time.
For those who are interested, the article is here.
https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(21)00370-6
It seems that what Giannopoylos describes as coming of the Hellenes (IE branch)
what Georgiev believes as Proto-Greek Language,
seems to be working model.
Maybe the model could be factional also with Lazarides papper, about Myceneans and Minoans.
Pastoral Semitic speakers also had their form of male democracy. Phoenician city-states too.
Actualy the Visigoths had been betrayed very badly by the Romans twice :
First when they were allowed to cross the Danube :
In 376, the Thervings came under increasing pressure from the Huns, who had already conquered their kinsmen, the Greuthungi. Fritigern asked Valens to allow the Thervingi to cross the northern Roman border and settle in Moesia or Thracia, with the Danube River and Roman frontier forts protecting them from the Huns. Valens agreed to permit Fritigern's followers to enter the empire. In return, they would be subject to military service, but would be treated the same as other Roman subjects. As it turned out, neither happened. Meanwhile, Athanaric and many of his followers retreated to Caucaland ("the Highlands", presumably the Eastern Carpathians and Transylvania).
During the autumn of 376, the Romans helped Alavivus and Fritigern's people cross the Danube and settle in the province of Moesia. In the winter of 376/7, a famine hit the areas settled by the Thervingi and their appeals for help went unanswered.[6] The Roman governors of the area, Lupicinus and Maximus, treated them badly. They sold them food only at extremely high prices, which forced many Goths to sell their children as slaves. They invited several Thervingi leaders to a feast, in which they killed some and took others hostage. Alavivus most likely remained a hostage, but Fritigern was able to escape and he became leader of the Thervingi. Soon he declared war on the Roman Empire.
Second during and after the Battle of Frigidus :
By 392, Alaric had entered Roman military service, which coincided with a reduction of hostilities between Goths and Romans.[17] In 394, he led a Gothic force that helped Emperor Theodosius defeat the Frankish usurper Arbogast—fighting at the behest of Eugenius—at the Battle of Frigidus.[18] Despite sacrificing around 10,000 of his men, who had been victims of Theodosius' callous tactical decision to overwhelm the enemies front lines using Gothic foederati,[19] Alaric received little recognition from the emperor. Alaric was among the few who survived the protracted and bloody affair.[20] Many Romans considered it their "gain" and a victory that so many Goths had died during the Battle of Frigidus River.[21] Recent biographer, Douglas Boin, posits that seeing ten thousand of his (Alaric's) dead kinsmen likely elicited questions about what kind of ruler Theodosius actually had been and whether remaining in direct Roman service was best for men like him.[22] Refused the reward he expected, which included a promotion to the position of Magister militum and command of regular Roman units, Alaric mutinied and began to march against Constantinople.
That is how Rome called the rage of the Visigoths over themselves, resulting in the sack of Rome in 410.
I don't even know how to respond to this 'goddam steppe brutes!' thread.
Blaming the fall of the Western Roman Empire entirely to the Germanic tribes isn‘t completely correct. Some historians say that moral decay, the male Roman population becoming lazy and diseases weakened the Empire. So, Rome was in decline before the Germanics sounded the death kneel, gave the final blow to it. The thing is, that at one point, the empire was split into Western and Eastern empires. And the center of the Empire was not Rome anymore but Constantinople. So, the center of the Empire moved to the East, thus all the money, funds, innovation, and relevance, too. This move made the Western Empire a nonpriority and there wasn‘t much investment in that part of the Empire, thus its development started stagnating. Keep in mind that Germanic tribespeople became the bulk of the soldiers/mercenaries in West Rome. They were fighting against other German barbarians to stop their invasion and to secure the border. So, Germanic tribes made sure that the Western Empire didn‘t collapse earlier than it did. Furthermore, the Goths were not that destructive. The Vandals were, but they were outmatched by the Huns. To Romans, the Huns were the most savage of the savages.
The bottom line is, that Rome had many issues. Eastern Rome became more important than the Western part. Hence, West Rome was pretty abandoned, lacked funds, and wasn‘t well-governed. Due to the lack of funds, the empire was unable to maintain its massive landholdings, and invading forces began to conquer them slowly, over time.
I think you're right.
The ability to learn from others and adapt.
Otherwise they couldn't survive.
They did more than just survive.
Gene-flow from steppe individuals into Cucuteni-Trypillia associated populations indicates long-standing contacts and gradual admixture-Alexander Immel (2.019)-
Recently, it was hypothesized that due to their high population densities, the CTC megasettlements served as a focus point for the emergence and large-scale radiation of Y. pestis lineages across Eurasia during the Neolithic. Amongst the four Moldovan specimens, we did not detect any signals of a Y. pestis infection, although the three individuals from Pocrovca were discovered in a multiple burial (without any traces of violence), which would render death due to an epidemic event plausible. Interestingly, we detected steppe-related ancestry in the Late Eneolithic CTC burials from the Republic of Moldova. The presence of this component suggests moderate genetic influx from individuals affiliated with steppe cultures into the CTC associated gene-pool as early as 3500 BCE; at the same time, archaeological evidence display an increase of quantity of Tripolyerelated finds in the steppe area. Thus, the steppe component had arrived in the eastern part of the continent in farmer communities well before it first appeared in the west, i.e. in the Corded Ware people around 2800 BCE. This finding establishes eastern Europe as an old genetic contact zone between locals and incoming steppe people, which is supported by two other early dating specimens from Ukraine
One likely source population that could have introduced the steppe ancestry component into the CTC gene-pool might have been individuals associated with the eastern Eurasian M****ithic, e.g. the Ukraine M****ithic people, Eastern hunter-gatherers or even later-dating Yamnaya steppe pastoralists. However, this hypothesis challenges a previously published scenario of Yamnaya horsemen massively migrating in war into central Europe
NO Yersinia pestis and NO massive migrations
Right. This from the man who once hinted that starving people from the Middle East trying to reach Europe by boat should be allowed to drown, and doesn't want even one starving child to be let into his country, a country, by the way, which accepted lots of Middle Easterners when they needed cheap labor, but he wants them now to all be sent back.
Do you hear yourself? Do you have any self-awareness whatsoever? You say the Roman government deserved to have its whole civilization crushed, a civilization from which a huge chunk of Europe benefited and was loyal to, for behavior you've advocated in your own time by your countrymen against Middle Easterners and Africans. Of all the hypocrisy...
Looking at it strictly as a matter of practicality, do you think Rome could have absorbed all the starving Barbarian hordes fleeing from the Huns?
You don't even realize that these Roman officials could have been Gauls or border Gemans who might have been your ancestors. Do you think they were Italians on those borders by that time?
You should know after my thousands of posts here that I don't state as fact something that I cannot prove.
See:
https://www.ling.upenn.edu/~rnoyer/courses/51/AegeanBronzeAge.pdf
Is the University of Pennsylvania a good enough source for you? Note the word DESTRUCTION.
Also please read the following article.
https://www.greek-thesaurus.gr/p1b.html
How many times does it have to be proved to you, pray tell?
"The development observable during the second phase of the Early Bronze Age comes to an end during the third and last phase of the Period (2200-2000 B.C.). Evident are destructions, the abandonment of settlements and a general disorganisation that has been traditionally associated with the incursion of new populations. The Middle Bronze Age (2000-1600 B.C.) is characterised initially by an economic and cultural decline,as can be seen in the poor remains of the settlements and in the poverty of the burials."
I wasn't aware you were constrained to come here or to read the thread.
first of all you're twisting my words and changing the subject, this way can go on and on and on
second you told just 1 or 2 days ago that everyone within the whole Roman empire was a Roman
and do you think people in Italy weren't cheering the death of 10.000 Visigoths ?
traditionally associated with : meaning : we have no proof but people like you always blaim the steppe people
do you have more details : when exactly and in what parts of Greece did the destructions happen?
and what about the diseases you claim?
maybe we should stick to the facts of the thread and stop phantasising about those brute herders from the steppe with all kinds of diseases
you're highjacking the thread
You asked for proof. I provided it, including the teaching curriculum at the University of Pennsylvania. You think these scholars are not basing their conclusions on ARCHAEOLOGY? They described what those archaeologists found.
It's clear you won't believe it because you don't want to believe it. You'll have some excuse for every paper I present so why should I bother.
Since you claim it's not true, find published papers that support your point of view.
the papers don't provide any proof, not even a claim
they say the destructions are traditionaly associated with invading steppe people
they don't endorse this claim themselves
and nothing about diseases
we can go on and on like this
unless if you come up with something more substantial, I rest my case
This thread has been viewed 120993 times.