Let's say the Roman Empire never really gets off the ground for whatever reason, and never expands beyond Italy. Obviously, this results in massive butterflies. However, I think the Germanic peoples will still expand out of their homeland in Scandinavia. What happens to their expansion with no Roman Empire?
Barbarian Migration Without Rome?
- Thread starter 8Deer
- Start date
My opinion is that most of them would go east, towards the Black Sea. Gaul and Celtic Bohemia will remain pretty strong without Roman intervention, so while the Germanic tribes may raid these regions, they likely would not permeate into them, or conquer them like OTL.
Instead, they would probably head towards the Black Sea and the Balkans, which would be war torn and out of shape, while still being extremely wealthy and valuably, aka, the perfect target. (There is some precedent for this OTL with the Goths). The Germanic tribes would likely settle in Dacia, Thrace, and parts of the Ukraine, and then consistently raid south into the Balkans. Who knows, you might end up with reversed Slavic and Germanic fates, where the Germanic languages are the ones split between North (Scandinavian) and South (Balkan).
I think later the Slavs would move into what we consider Germany because of the vacuum caused by the eastward Germanic migration.
I also think this gives the Sarmatians a fair chance at surviving as a culture and people along the steppes.
The Huns would certainly be more focused on Greece and the Near East.
What happens later with the Avars, Magyars, and Vikings is hard to say, and greatly depends on the rest of the political world, however it might be shaped.
Instead, they would probably head towards the Black Sea and the Balkans, which would be war torn and out of shape, while still being extremely wealthy and valuably, aka, the perfect target. (There is some precedent for this OTL with the Goths). The Germanic tribes would likely settle in Dacia, Thrace, and parts of the Ukraine, and then consistently raid south into the Balkans. Who knows, you might end up with reversed Slavic and Germanic fates, where the Germanic languages are the ones split between North (Scandinavian) and South (Balkan).
I think later the Slavs would move into what we consider Germany because of the vacuum caused by the eastward Germanic migration.
I also think this gives the Sarmatians a fair chance at surviving as a culture and people along the steppes.
The Huns would certainly be more focused on Greece and the Near East.
What happens later with the Avars, Magyars, and Vikings is hard to say, and greatly depends on the rest of the political world, however it might be shaped.
One thing that will be different is that we'd have no Germanic warriors who have served in the Roman legions and thus know the geography and the strength of the enemy.
Climate in asia would still be cold and in the mediterranean basin would still be warmer.
Thus movements would be more or less in the same direction.
Cuāuhtemōc
Banned
I'm rather discussing the specific tribes. It's not we would expect tribes such as the Franks, Goths or Vandals to be dominant. That's just my two cents. The OP is asking a very general question and so it's kind of hard to answer that.
Would that means in the long run maybe a more eastern Slavic continuum, and stronger assimilation of the small finno-ugrian peoples of Ex-URSS and around?
I personally think the Slavs would head more westward into the Germanic woodlands. The reason why the Slavs migrated East to begin with was because of a strong Germanic presence in the West. When the Goths, Huns, and Iranic tribes all left the Balkans, the Slavs simply filled the vacuum. So, if they don't leave the Balkans (Because without Rome, there would be little incentive to move west) the Slavs would just fill the vacuum to their west.
Make me wonder if the Three Russias would be changed a lot in the long run...
I am facinated by those finno-ugrians peopels now, they appparently had a much larger part of russia and around in ancient days, but they where assimilated slowly... so....
A state distantly related to Finland and Letonia, surviving, could be cool....
What would happens to the Balts? More branches live?
I am facinated by those finno-ugrians peopels now, they appparently had a much larger part of russia and around in ancient days, but they where assimilated slowly... so....
A state distantly related to Finland and Letonia, surviving, could be cool....
What would happens to the Balts? More branches live?
If the Germanic tribes migrate into western Europe in a Rome-less TL, then it probably won't make a difference. Rome did not "bring civilization" to people who were already industrious and innovative. Neither the Celts or the ancient Germans were much like the forest-dwelling "ooga boogha" tribal folk that most people imagine them to be. They may have been more rustic-leaning than the Romans or Greeks, but access to international trade would make all the difference to any culture. Celts already had writing, making practical use of both Latin and Greek alphabets, so education would have spread or persisted very well without Roman rule. And if they carve out new states in Italy, Gaul and Spain, they would likely assimilate the cultural traditions of their predecessors anyway.
Minor correction; from what I know, celtic writting system(s) was kept for the religious elite...
No, religion as a written subject was forbidden. Writing for commercial transactions, graffiti, census's and personal correspondence did happen.
I am not sure for ALL celts, but irish and brittonic ones kept their writting for druids and such, I think.
I am maybe wrong.