The Worst Barbarians and barbarian invasions of history

daft · Mar 2, 2015

This topic might be old but it has to do with your opinion of the worst and most destructive barbarian invasion/reign of history.
There are many historical examples of barbarian conquests, destruction and the chaos they caused on cultured civilizations of the world.
Please name your picks, why do you think they were so deadly/destructive, and why did they impact the course of history of civilization.
Are there any possible positive occurrences of barbarian exploits/conquest which gave a bonus/pushed forward the advancements of human civilization in history?

schlaufuchs · Mar 2, 2015

First you need to define some terms.

What is a barbarian
What is meant by destructive, particularly destructive to whom
Bonus in what sense?
Advancement in what sense?
"Human civilization" in what sense? And particularly why are "barbarians" different from "human civilization"

daft · Mar 2, 2015

My friend, this is not a discussion on term definition, it has to do with "barbarians" and their influence, or lack thereof, upon the history of the Earth's Civilization.
For example:
Do you agree that Attila, and his Huns, their conquests and history, as perceived by the European Civilization, was it influential?, and if so, in what way? Was the outcome of their conquests utterly destructive, or was it beneficial in regards to the history of civilization in any way? Give me examples, conclusions, theories and points of view. That is all I ask for, for the general discussion and enlightenment is all I seek.

schlaufuchs · Mar 2, 2015

daft said:
My friend, this is not a discussion on term definition, it has to do with "barbarians" and their influence, or lack thereof, upon the history of the Earth's Civilization.
For example:
Do you agree that Attila, and his Huns, their conquests and history, as perceived by the European Civilization, was it influential?, and if so, in what way? Was the outcome of their conquests utterly destructive, or was it beneficial in regards to the history of civilization in any way? Give me examples, conclusions, theories and points of view. That is all I ask for, for the general discussion and enlightenment is all I seek.

But this is precisely what I mean. Why are Attila and his Huns considered barbarians, beyond the obvious - that they weren't Romans, a categorization which included nearly every human in existence in the 5th century? And influential in what sense? Globally? 1000 years after the fact? No. Not particularly. In the immediate aftermath of his defeat at the Aleutian Plains within the context of the Roman political system? Absolutely. You need to define your terms so we know what, specifically you're asking. Barbarian and Human Civilization are vague, and (I would and have argued) highly contentious terms. Beneficial is a difficult term to grok in this context precisely because Attila's ride through Europe was rather beneficial to the Huns, at least in the short term. Whereas to people living in the Yucatan peninsula it probably wasn't all that relevant.

Moreover the question raises some issues in terms of framing the historical conversation as one exclusively of progress - that history progresses ever forward and people can only help or hinder it. This is a wrongheaded way to think about history. You're framing the debate teleologically - only things that are relevant to the here and now were relevant then - and this inherently litters the discussion with personal biases, which leads to a rather unfactual history, unfortunately.

So it may not specifically be a debate about terms per se, but these are terms which need to be defined first and foremost before any meaningful debate can be had.

Domen · Mar 2, 2015

Hey Owen, in the other thread on barbarians, you wrote:

(and a few dubious inscriptions of Vandal found in Africa)

Can you write more on this - what is dubious about them?

Knight-Dragon · Mar 2, 2015

IMO the worst one was when the European barbarians 'discovered' the Americas. Their diseases destroyed every Amerindian society from pole to pole, and enabled European conquerors and settlers to move in and replace native peoples politically everywhere (and physically in N America)...

:ack:

Owen's points are spot on. Since to me, as a Chinese, every non-Chinese is a barbarian.

superbeer · Mar 3, 2015

Aztecs!

They practiced human sacrifice. But were they really worse than anyone else? Spain and its inquisition, dungeons and torture, the Romans let their lowlifes and captives fight each other to death in colosseums, for the entertainment of Roman citizens. Chinese peasants built the Great Wall, at the cost of thousands, perhaps millions, of lives.

sydhe · Mar 3, 2015

The Magyars were pretty destructive until their defeat at the Lechfeld, but a result was the creation of the Holy Roman Empire and the Kingdom of Hungary.

MilesGregarius · Mar 4, 2015

Knight-Dragon said:
IMO the worst one was when the European barbarians 'discovered' the Americas. Their diseases destroyed every Amerindian society from pole to pole, and enabled European conquerors and settlers to move in and replace native peoples politically everywhere (and physically in N America)...

Agreed. (Dis)honorable mention goes to the Dutch and English East India Companies as well as the Belgians in the Congo.

Phrossack · Mar 8, 2015

Owen's points are valid. The question makes little sense without a lot of definitions.

Kyriakos · Mar 8, 2015

Owen Glyndwr said:
But this is precisely what I mean. Why are Attila and his Huns considered barbarians, beyond the obvious - that they weren't Romans, a categorization which included nearly every human in existence in the 5th century? And influential in what sense? Globally? 1000 years after the fact? No. Not particularly. In the immediate aftermath of his defeat at the Aleutian Plains within the context of the Roman political system? Absolutely. You need to define your terms so we know what, specifically you're asking. Barbarian and Human Civilization are vague, and (I would and have argued) highly contentious terms. Beneficial is a difficult term to grok in this context precisely because Attila's ride through Europe was rather beneficial to the Huns, at least in the short term. Whereas to people living in the Yucatan peninsula it probably wasn't all that relevant.

Moreover the question raises some issues in terms of framing the historical conversation as one exclusively of progress - that history progresses ever forward and people can only help or hinder it. This is a wrongheaded way to think about history. You're framing the debate teleologically - only things that are relevant to the here and now were relevant then - and this inherently litters the discussion with personal biases, which leads to a rather unfactual history, unfortunately.

So it may not specifically be a debate about terms per se, but these are terms which need to be defined first and foremost before any meaningful debate can be had.

About as crucial and sensible as arguing that it is not evidently apt to term the Cyclopai as barbarian in relation to Odysseus and his crew. I mean who are we to judge how other people/monsters act in their life anyway :lol:

The term 'barbarian' has the set connotation that one labelled such is clearly far less civilised, or virtually uncivilised compared to the other party. While as any term it can be abused, it does not follow logic that it is a special case where extremes allowing the juxtaposition just do not happen to exist- let alone in the ancient or medieval era the thread is about. Nomadic races invading highly urbanised lands is a very clear example of a barbarian attack.

Phrossack · Mar 8, 2015

Kyriakos said:
About as crucial and sensible as arguing that it is not evidently apt to term the Cyclopai as barbarian in relation to Odysseus and his crew. I mean who are we to judge how other people/monsters act in their life anyway

The term 'barbarian' has the set connotation that one labelled such is clearly far less civilised, or virtually uncivilised compared to the other party. While as any term it can be abused, it does not follow logic that it is a special case where extremes allowing the juxtaposition just do not happen to exist- let alone in the ancient or medieval era the thread is about. Nomadic races invading highly urbanised lands is a very clear example of a barbarian attack.

Quisque est barbarus alii. There is no "civilization-o-meter" with which we can measure the nebulous terms of "civilization" and "barbarism"--which are loaded terms since there's a clear connotation of civilization=good, smart, and "cultured" (another tricky term) and barbarism=bad, stupid, "uncultured". The belief that these things can be objectively measured comes off as rather unfounded and chauvinistic. If we're going with original definitions, then a "barbarian invasion" involves an invasion by literally any non-Greek people, but then we're going to have to include just about all of history everywhere.

Kyriakos · Mar 9, 2015

Phrossack said:
Quisque est barbarus alii. There is no "civilization-o-meter" with which we can measure the nebulous terms of "civilization" and "barbarism"--which are loaded terms since there's a clear connotation of civilization=good, smart, and "cultured" (another tricky term) and barbarism=bad, stupid, "uncultured". The belief that these things can be objectively measured comes off as rather unfounded and chauvinistic. If we're going with original definitions, then a "barbarian invasion" involves an invasion by literally any non-Greek people, but then we're going to have to include just about all of history everywhere.

I'll think that you do not even actually fail to note how your post is entirely unable to challenge the very clear logic in my own post. Cause otherwise i have to suppose it is pretty futile to discuss further..

Phrossack · Mar 10, 2015

Kyriakos said:
I'll think that you do not even actually fail to note how your post is entirely unable to challenge the very clear logic in my own post. Cause otherwise i have to suppose it is pretty futile to discuss further..

Owen raised excellent points, and you simply responded with a chauvinistic and extremely simplistic argument that obviously, a "barbarian" is someone "less civilized," though you try hard not to define "civilization." Instead, you just sneer at people. Are you actually interested in a discussion, or do you deem yourself above such petty things as using logic on mere mortals?

Domen · Mar 10, 2015

In what way is that "chauvinistic" ???

Simplistic, maybe, but only because he didn't suggest any point of reference for measuring the degree of "civilized".

Phrossack said:
There is no "civilization-o-meter"

How about year 800 BC as a point of reference:

https://www.gwern.net/docs/2003-murray-human-accomplishment.pdf

On the other hand, a period of decline in civilizational advancement in most of the world preceded year 800 BC:

Kyriakos · Mar 11, 2015

Phrossack said:
Owen raised excellent points, and you simply responded with a chauvinistic and extremely simplistic argument that obviously, a "barbarian" is someone "less civilized," though you try hard not to define "civilization." Instead, you just sneer at people. Are you actually interested in a discussion, or do you deem yourself above such petty things as using logic on mere mortals?

It is misleading to accuse me of looking down on you when you force yourself to lie down in the first place and i am just not following suit.

Terms do not form to connote stuff because one is more or less 'chauvinistic' (lol), given that the mental world itself is not really conscious of such petty issues. You always mistake individual consciousness (and the lowly elements of it at that, such as boring 'i am less chauvinistic than thou' stances) for the actual phenomenon of thought. TLDR: terms are not forming because some folk are bad and you are the savior, sorry 'Phro

gay_Aleks · Mar 11, 2015

That one time humans invaded from Africa to every continent was pretty bad.

Kyriakos · Mar 11, 2015

Tolni said:
That one time humans invaded from Africa to every continent was pretty bad.

"ἀεὶ λιβύη φέρει τι κακόν" :mischief:

(evil always comes from Africa). Aristotle connotes that as dismissive views on subjects as well, not merely 'da eviil', so don't hate

At any rate Cyrene was a clear center for Greek math since the era of Socrates.

Phrossack · Mar 11, 2015

Kyriakos said:
It is misleading to accuse me of looking down on you when you force yourself to lie down in the first place and i am just not following suit.

Terms do not form to connote stuff because one is more or less 'chauvinistic' (lol), given that the mental world itself is not really conscious of such petty issues. You always mistake individual consciousness (and the lowly elements of it at that, such as boring 'i am less chauvinistic than thou' stances) for the actual phenomenon of thought. TLDR: terms are not forming because some folk are bad and you are the savior, sorry 'Phro

You are striving mightily to avoid addressing the issue.

Traitorfish · Mar 11, 2015

Kyriakos said:
It is misleading to accuse me of looking down on you when you force yourself to lie down in the first place and i am just not following suit.

Terms do not form to connote stuff because one is more or less 'chauvinistic' (lol), given that the mental world itself is not really conscious of such petty issues. You always mistake individual consciousness (and the lowly elements of it at that, such as boring 'i am less chauvinistic than thou' stances) for the actual phenomenon of thought. TLDR: terms are not forming because some folk are bad and you are the savior, sorry 'Phro

Nope, didn't get a word of that. Something about Plato and baseball? Couldn't tell ya.

The Worst Barbarians and barbarian invasions of history

The fargone

Break My Heart

The fargone

Break My Heart

Misico dux Vandalorum

Unhidden Dragon

Chieftain

King of Kongs

Half-baked Renegade

Armored Fish and Armored Men

Creator

Armored Fish and Armored Men

Creator

Armored Fish and Armored Men

Misico dux Vandalorum

Creator

from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free!

Creator

Armored Fish and Armored Men

The Tighnahulish Kid

Similar threads