Are Barbarian Migrations just a myth?

[Domen]

Interesting lecture:

Part 1:

http://video.ias.edu/node/5304

Part 2:

https://video.ias.edu/topology/2013/1002-PatrickGeary

 

[sophie]

Mostly, yes.

 

[Domen]

Mostly, yes.

Indeed, my question should be: "to what extent". Because every myth has a grain of truth.

But for example what was the proportion of migrating populations to "stationary" populations, etc.

In some cases I suppose it was more about replacement of "people in charge" by rebellious mercenaries.

For example when Odovacer "ended the Roman Empire" (i.e. overthrew Romulus Augustuls), he was a Roman citizen.

 

[History_Buff]

The previous thread on the topic: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=431647

 

[Traitorfish]

Indeed, my question should be: "to what extent". Because every myth has a grain of truth.

Well, that's not true. Jewish blood libel, for instance, rubbish from top to bottom. Some myths contain a grain of truth, but others are just myths, and there's no particular to assume the former.

 

[Kyriakos]

I thought that barbarians were called that due to having a crap consonant-wise language Something sounding like "Bar bar bar bar bar!" etc

But i guess it is more PC to use the Barbarian's own definition of Barbarian, so as to connotate the term more negatively

 

[Domen]

Something sounding like "Bar bar bar bar bar!" etc

Like rabarbar you mean?:

http://pl.bab.la/slownik/polski-angielski/rabarbar

 

[gay_Aleks]

I thought that barbarians were called that due to having a crap consonant-wise language Something sounding like "Bar bar bar bar bar!" etc

But i guess it is more PC to use the Barbarian's own definition of Barbarian, so as to connotate the term more negatively

So they had a Bar association? No wonder everyone hated them, after all, nobody likes lawyers!