U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Covid-19 Information Page
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 10-05-2020, 10:51 AM
 
Location: Lake Huron Shores
1,186 posts, read 224,200 times
Reputation: 767

Advertisements

In history, it has been seen many times that the nomadic Eurasian steppe people were able to cause downfall of great civilizations in the levant and other parts of the Middle East. What inherent abilities did they possess that allowed them to do this ? They were certainly not as technologically advanced as the civilizations in the levant, so why were they able to cause collapse of the Assyrians, Ancient Rome, The Persians, the Abbasids, and many more. I think it’s interesting to study this.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-05-2020, 01:02 PM
 
Location: State of Transition
86,218 posts, read 79,387,653 times
Reputation: 88589
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrozenI69 View Post
In history, it has been seen many times that the nomadic Eurasian steppe people were able to cause downfall of great civilizations in the levant and other parts of the Middle East. What inherent abilities did they possess that allowed them to do this ? They were certainly not as technologically advanced as the civilizations in the levant, so why were they able to cause collapse of the Assyrians, Ancient Rome, The Persians, the Abbasids, and many more. I think it’s interesting to study this.
Nomadism itself has the advantage of being able to strike quickly and effectively, then disperse. And technological sophistication isn't relevant. They were consummate horsemen and warriors, like their later heirs, the Mongols. The Mongols would strike so fast and unexpectedly, nobody in their path knew what had hit them.

Did the Scythians really cause the collapse of the Persians, though? I'm not familiar with that part of their story.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2020, 01:02 PM
 
Location: Ohio
22,343 posts, read 15,672,793 times
Reputation: 18864
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrozenI69 View Post
In history, it has been seen many times that the nomadic Eurasian steppe people were able to cause downfall of great civilizations in the levant and other parts of the Middle East. What inherent abilities did they possess that allowed them to do this ? They were certainly not as technologically advanced as the civilizations in the levant, so why were they able to cause collapse of the Assyrians, Ancient Rome, The Persians, the Abbasids, and many more. I think it’s interesting to study this.
I'm not seeing where they were.

With respect to the Levant, the Gutians, who lived between the Tigris and Karun Rivers over-ran the Sumerians. The Sumerians regained control after a century only to be overthrown by the Akkadians (specifically Sargon of Akkad) in 2,334 BCE. The Sumerians gained control again, only to be over-run by the Amorites (the people idiots call "Babylonians") circa 1,830 BCE

The Amorites were overthrown circa 1,530 BCE by the Kassites who lived north of the Gutians between the Tigris and Karun Rivers and who are the biblical Kush (not Put in Africa).

The Kassites were overthrown by a cosmopolitan group of people that included remnants of Akkad, Kush, Amorite, Mari, Nuzi, Mitanni and Eblaite kingdoms who styled themselves Babylonians circa 1,125 BCE.

Those Babylonians were over-run by the Assyrians in 729 BCE who were then over-run by Greek-speaking Canaanites, or "Chaldeans" in 612 BCE.

The Chaldeans got tossed by the Persians in 529 BCE.

The Persians got trashed by the Macedonians in 331 BCE.

That's hardly the Eurasian steps.

The Abbasids did get buried by the Mongols, but the Abbasids were hardly a "superpower."

You could certainly make the case for Rome, who suffered at the hands of the Magyars, Goths and Visigoths.

However, it would be absurd to compare Rome in 425 CE to Rome of 200 CE or Rome of 100 CE.

Rome had lost 1/3rd of its population through plagues. If you want to know how bad it was, read the accounts of cohorts and centuries being attacked and mauled by packs of wolves and bears.

Why? I just told you why. Plague. Whole villages were wiped out permanently. No one wanted to move there and in the absence of humans, animals start encroaching on the lands.

The tactics employed by the Magyars, Goths and Visigoths were more akin to modern warfare and not the set-piece battle strategy the Romans and so many others used.

Those countries basically fought Western-style: take land, hold it, reinforce, take more land, hold it, reinforce.

The groups migrating out of Eurasia fought Soviet-style: Attack the objective, destroy it and move on or withdraw.

The Hittite Kingdom would be a great candidate, but you didn't mention them.

They got attacked by three different groups from the northwest, northeast and southwest. They just collapsed.

I think the Hittite Kingdom would have eventually collapsed anyway, but they could have easily lasted another 3-5 centuries, or maybe longer, and there's no telling what influence they would have had on the "world" in doing so.

Those migrations out of Eurasia were economic-based. They're pastoral, meaning they're semi-nomadic herders. As populations increase, it becomes more difficult to move your herd from pasture to pasture or grazing lands to grazing lands and the only place to expand is West.

Those populations compete for resources and land is the single biggest resource.

There is on occasion the individual factor. That would be true for the Mongols. Ghengiz wanted to rule and own everything. That's a page from a different book, but that's what happens sometimes. Philip and Alexander of Macedonia were no different. They wanted to run the big machine.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2020, 01:14 PM
 
9,406 posts, read 7,944,390 times
Reputation: 4722
I made thread about how mongols should/shouldnt have been as good at warfare as they were.

//www.city-data.com/forum/histo...ols-under.html

I still dont think they had any inherent advantage besides large supply of horses. They had no trees, or metals.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-05-2020, 06:04 PM
 
Location: The North Star State
2,963 posts, read 913,386 times
Reputation: 12452
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrozenI69 View Post
In history, it has been seen many times that the nomadic Eurasian steppe people were able to cause downfall of great civilizations in the levant and other parts of the Middle East. What inherent abilities did they possess that allowed them to do this ? They were certainly not as technologically advanced as the civilizations in the levant, so why were they able to cause collapse of the Assyrians, Ancient Rome, The Persians, the Abbasids, and many more. I think it’s interesting to study this.
All civilizations have their nadirs when they're weak. We're talking about many different civilizations over periods spanning many centuries. Some of them were bound to fall now and then to forces from adjacent areas.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 09:01 AM
 
13,704 posts, read 19,857,566 times
Reputation: 22881
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrozenI69 View Post
In history, it has been seen many times that the nomadic Eurasian steppe people were able to cause downfall of great civilizations in the levant and other parts of the Middle East. What inherent abilities did they possess that allowed them to do this ? They were certainly not as technologically advanced as the civilizations in the levant, so why were they able to cause collapse of the Assyrians, Ancient Rome, The Persians, the Abbasids, and many more. I think it’s interesting to study this.
I don't think you can contribute the fall of these civilizations all to the Eurasian steppes really, but the huge benefit that that part of the world had was grazing land for horses. They became horse cultures and as such developed methods of warfare on horseback, or using chariots (as well as transportation, trade and communication), that these other civilizations had difficulty countering. The middle east and Europe of course brought in horses but they lacked the vast grasslands of the steppes to really integrate horses into the every day culture.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Today, 10:54 AM
 
13,417 posts, read 18,439,645 times
Reputation: 15483
All this is under assumption that, history was, as described.
What you really want to do is to think about reality of warfare and distances to be covered for those described victories.

You need to talk to specialists in military logistics, weapons of the time specialists, siege specialists, even equestrian specialists. Archeologists. Just a few examples. Mongols, for example, learned that they conquered half the world, from Europeans, who told them that. As, they have NO records of such ventures of their own. Neither are there any physical evidence, in their steps, of any even remotely suitable weapons manufacturing, supplies manufacturing, ores to make all that, farming, suitable enough, and so on. Even horses, capable of miraculous raids, covering distances described (yes, even with a spare horse on rein). You need to talk to people, who KNOW this stuff, not librarians and reviewers of pages, written by someone else, as copy, of pages, written by someone else. Some things are - and were - simply physically impossible and, only lay minds can buy into all this "appear out of nowhere, in huge numbers, well equipped, trained, organized and supplied" masses of the most advanced armies of their times.

Of course, you are welcome to believe, whatever you want to but, no one ever, being a wild horseman his entire life, managed to siege and surmount fortresses with more than well equipped and trained garrisons. It simply does not work that way. Leave those fairy tales to Hollywood.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > History
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2020, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top