Great Dark Age Weapon The Harems? (ancient, war, Romans, England)

[ddmhughes]

Historically the world population increased very slowly mainly because so many children died before they reached adult hood. I have read that back in the Middle Ages if a woman had 5 kids on average only 2 of them would survive to adulthood. Even today the replacement rate in much of Africa is over 3 children per woman (TFR). I know that I would have died a couple of times as a child if it wasn't for modern medicine. Also it was much more common for women to die in child birth.

Most ancient invaders either wiped out the native populations (England) or replaced them with their own or they conquered and were slowly absorbed into the local population (France). Today France is more Celtic (native) then German (invaders). The exception is the Arabs, Turks and Vikings who did neither but still replaced the native populations.

All 3 of those cultures kept harems. My theory is that this is what allowed those 3 cultures to have such a huge generic impact even though they were greatly outnumbered by the native people they conquered. Basically they were able to marry, kidnap or buy native women but native men could not do the same to their women. This helped slow the native population growth while greatly accelerating their population growth. What do you think?

[plwhit]

Originally Posted by ddmhughes

Historically the world population increased very slowly mainly because so many children died before they reached adult hood. I have read that back in the Middle Ages if a woman had 5 kids on average only 2 of them would survive to adulthood. Even today the replacement rate in much of Africa is over 3 children per woman (TFR). I know that I would have died a couple of times as a child if it wasn't for modern medicine. Also it was much more common for women to die in child birth.

Most ancient invaders either wiped out the native populations (England) or replaced them with their own or they conquered and were slowly absorbed into the local population (France). Today France is more Celtic (native) then German (invaders). The exception is the Arabs, Turks and Vikings who did neither but still replaced the native populations.

All 3 of those cultures kept harems. My theory is that this is what allowed those 3 cultures to have such a huge generic impact even though they were greatly outnumbered by the native people they conquered. Basically they were able to marry, kidnap or buy native women but native men could not do the same to their women. This helped slow the native population growth while greatly accelerating their population growth. What do you think?

This is interesting, the Vikings had harems? Can you post the references to these cultures and their harems please?

[ddmhughes]

Originally Posted by plwhit

This is interesting, the Vikings had harems? Can you post the references to these cultures and their harems please?

Harems may be a poor choice of words for the Vikings female sex slaves. The population of Iceland is mostly descended from Viking men and Celtic women.

I have read information about this from many different sources I'm sure I couldn't find them all nor do I care too. So I will not be posting my sources since this not a term paper that I am writing.....Care too list your sources that these cultures didn't have harems?

[majoun]

Originally Posted by ddmhughes

Most ancient invaders either wiped out the native populations (England)

The Britons weren't wiped out, they were pushed to Wales and Cornwall. And I suspect the Anglo-Saxons didn't wipe out the Briton females.

or replaced them with their own or they conquered and were slowly absorbed into the local population (France). Today France is more Celtic (native) then German (invaders). The exception is the Arabs, Turks and Vikings who did neither but still replaced the native populations.

I suspect many Turks are descended from Greeks who converted to Islam.

You forgot to mention another group who had female sex slaves - the Comanche. (Not technically "harems" because they were completely unaware of SE Europe, the Middle East, and North Africa, but they had sex slaves all the same). Yet they weren't able to wipe out the Kiowas, Arapahos, and Apaches in the Comancheria, or totally displace those peoples.

[Mikestone8]

#Did the Arabs actually displace the native populations of the regions they conquered?

Many of those peoples certainly adopted the the Arabic language, as those conquered by the Romans adopted the Latin language (in the west anyway), but no one suggests that the latter were displaced in favour of Roman settlers. Most weren't

[LetsRock]

Originally Posted by ddmhughes

Historically the world population increased very slowly mainly because so many children died before they reached adult hood. I have read that back in the Middle Ages if a woman had 5 kids on average only 2 of them would survive to adulthood. Even today the replacement rate in much of Africa is over 3 children per woman (TFR). I know that I would have died a couple of times as a child if it wasn't for modern medicine. Also it was much more common for women to die in child birth.

Most ancient invaders either wiped out the native populations (England) or replaced them with their own or they conquered and were slowly absorbed into the local population (France). Today France is more Celtic (native) then German (invaders). The exception is the Arabs, Turks and Vikings who did neither but still replaced the native populations.

All 3 of those cultures kept harems. My theory is that this is what allowed those 3 cultures to have such a huge generic impact even though they were greatly outnumbered by the native people they conquered. Basically they were able to marry, kidnap or buy native women but native men could not do the same to their women. This helped slow the native population growth while greatly accelerating their population growth. What do you think?

Most familes had many children also because they died in combat as soldiers for their rulers.

[BlackShoe]

Originally Posted by majoun

You forgot to mention another group who had female sex slaves - the Comanche. (Not technically "harems" because they were completely unaware of SE Europe, the Middle East, and North Africa, but they had sex slaves all the same). Yet they weren't able to wipe out the Kiowas, Arapahos, and Apaches in the Comancheria, or totally displace those peoples.

This practice was not unique to the Comanche, all of the Western tribes raped their female captives, and kept them in bondage. On occasion they would marry and be assimilated into the tribe. The Comanche and Kiowa became allies around 1790, and in 1840 made a truce with the Southern Cheyenne and Southern Arapaho, while remaining at war with the various Apache bands until the end of the frontier years.

[Gantz]

Originally Posted by ddmhughes

The exception is the Arabs, Turks and Vikings who did neither but still replaced the native populations.

Vikings didn't absorb the native populations in the East, but were absurbed by themselves. Russia was founded by the Vikings, but the small number of Vikings (relative to the population of the lands) assimilated into the general population within a few centuries.

I think this has more to do with the size of the invading army and their cultural values vs the size of native land population.

[ddmhughes]

Originally Posted by Mikestone8

#Did the Arabs actually displace the native populations of the regions they conquered?

Many of those peoples certainly adopted the the Arabic language, as those conquered by the Romans adopted the Latin language (in the west anyway), but no one suggests that the latter were displaced in favour of Roman settlers. Most weren't

I'm not sure how much of the middle East is descended from Arabs and how much of it is from people that adopted Arab culture. But the original people of North Africa are Berbers and they are now a small minority in most North African countrys. This is a huge area.

[plwhit]

Originally Posted by ddmhughes

Harems may be a poor choice of words for the Vikings female sex slaves. The population of Iceland is mostly descended from Viking men and Celtic women.

I have read information about this from many different sources I'm sure I couldn't find them all nor do I care too. So I will not be posting my sources since this not a term paper that I am writing.....Care too list your sources that these cultures didn't have harems?

Touchy touchy chill out, I was asking an honest question, not starting a flame war.