3 ms·
True, looks like 'reimagining history'. In my opinion, a lot of these 'migration' were done primarily to expand own territory even if current territory was suf
by i67vw3 3y ago
True, looks like 'reimagining history'.
In my opinion, a lot of these 'migration' were done primarily to expand own territory even if current territory was sufficient to fulfil needs of the population. It is human extinct to go to war with neighbours for petty reasons.
Recent Eg., Spanish invasion of america, british/dutch colonies. Also future expansion to Moon, Mars.
- OfSanguineFire 3y agoA lot of these migrations were done primarily because populations were being squeezed by neighbors. For so many of the migrations we have historical records documenting that group X had to move westward because group Y was encroaching on them from the east, and group Y was in turn facing pressure from group Z to their east. But because these chains often correlated with periods of poor climate that reduced the grassland that these pastoral peoples depended on, and there was less such instability during other periods, climate is viewed as a more prominent factor than mere greed for territory. European colonization is not a good comparison, inasmuch as that was carried out by sedentary populations that had completely different economies, religions, and political structures than the nomadic populations of the Eurasian steppe.