Recent comments in /f/history

MoreanSwordsman t1_it3ur1g wrote

Reply to comment by Capriama in Was there mass migration of Roman citizens from Western Empire to Eastern Empire during degredation and after fall of Western part of empire. by [deleted]

*Romans, not Greeks. Yes, they had Greek culture all around them, but they saw themselves as Romans. When you today go to Southern Cyprus and ask the people, they will tell you that they are Cypriots or Rums (Romans), but not Greeks.

7

AJ_Lounes t1_it3cvle wrote

Reply to comment by [deleted] in Was there mass migration of Roman citizens from Western Empire to Eastern Empire during degredation and after fall of Western part of empire. by [deleted]

Indeed, I saw afterwards that you've mentioned it was a long period yourself.

No worries for the politics side, that's what History is.

You're right. However, I would go back to what I said about how the barbarians were actually trying to respect and pursue what the Romans had established rather than erasing everything to start their own thing from scratch. The examples you're mentioning are right, but they are people who are moving away from places where sometimes bombs are literally raining and food supplies are almost non-existent.

If we go back to the barbarians, they in fact had all the interest possible of having the roman machine to keep on going, with already established laws, cereals farmed and functioning water systems. As I said above, would the barbarians had come into the empire in a more "viking" way, then no doubt the roman migration would have been much much more significant.

26

AJ_Lounes t1_it3ax0d wrote

Reply to comment by 9998000 in Was there mass migration of Roman citizens from Western Empire to Eastern Empire during degredation and after fall of Western part of empire. by [deleted]

Some history books are talking of an invasion from the barbarians but the reality's more grey. Barbarians were already in the landscape for a long time. As a matter of fact, by the end of the west empire, most of the army, including leaders, was made of barbarians. The "invasion" was in fact the arrival of big groups of people, fleeing themselves from what was probably more of an invasion this time : the Huns.

Yes, some tensions and conflicts probably occured in the process, but it was not the bloody invasion depicted in our school books.

6

[deleted] OP t1_it3apnb wrote

Reply to comment by AJ_Lounes in Was there mass migration of Roman citizens from Western Empire to Eastern Empire during degredation and after fall of Western part of empire. by [deleted]

I know decline was quite long period, that is why I mentioned in my post decline and fall. Since decline was happening for centuries not over night. That is why it might be bad question. Since many people could migrate during that time but in smaller groups, like we have today in EU. Balkan countires lost up to 1/3 of pop since early 1990s. From migration to wast mostly. I mean it in that way. Not like 1mil from middle east and africa comming in few mounths.

In advance sorry for bringing bit of politics, just wanted to give example of what I want to say.

34

AJ_Lounes t1_it384pi wrote

Reply to Was there mass migration of Roman citizens from Western Empire to Eastern Empire during degredation and after fall of Western part of empire. by [deleted]

Some probably did.

But for the most part, I don't think it was the case.

The process of the Fall of the western part was in fact quite long and not to be seen as one big wave of soldiers invading and killing everything. If it had been the case, then probably more roman migration would have occured indeed. But actually, the "barbarians" were already in the Roman landscape since quite some time. Quite a number of them was holding high positions within the military and it is even said that, by the end of the western part, most of the armies was barbarian or coming from barbarian bloodlines. All of this while the last emperors were losing in power and prestige.

Also, the Fall of the empire was probably not perceived the same way according to where you were living in the Empire. A citizen of the City was probably more concerned of losing the Emperor than let's say a farmer in the countryside who only knew approximately the emperor's face thanks to the money coins.

We must also not forget quite an interesting fact. The "barbarians" had no interest in destroying the Roman culture and infrastructures of supply and power. It appears that they actually wanted to preserve and pursue it (just have a look at how some leaders even yeeeears after the Fall did their best to bring the Empire, or at least the idea of the Empire, back). Some of the new people in charge actually asked for councelling from romans of long roman bloodlines on how to keep everything in place.

This probably helped in having the smoothest change as possible and so to not "scare" the roman people.

I would add that even 100-200 years after the fall, people who were descending from old roman families were much respected and had quite some positions of power, still as councellors or within the Church, which worked closely with the new powers in place across West Europe to maintain society.

454