Recent content by Gloss

Where is this idea that colonies were not self-sufficient coming from? They were sufficient after the first few decades. And the idea that population growth would cease without importing iron tools is also missing a justification, if iron is so essential then it wouldn't take more than a few...

What I don't understand is why are they so hungry for slaves both natives and European? It's not like they are running cash crop plantations back in Canada.

The thing with the Americas is that it's quite uneven(though you could say the same about the Old World), on one hand you had Mesoamerica and the Andes with dense populations but also the Amazon region on the other you had Argentina and the Caribbean not far from these dense regions that either...

In theory maize should be better than almost anything Europeans have, so where maize can grow in theory the native American package should be superior... though clearly most pre-Columbian estimates don't seem to reflect that.

Maybe our understanding of the main Austronesian expansion could help elucidate on this topic?

To be honest while the timeline might be fast, the Caribbean are actually decent land for the Norse to settle after they adopted some of the North American native crop package. Compare to even North America, the population of all the Caribbean island combined was pitifully small, I wager based...

My general attitude to questions like this is to zoom back and compare this to other such decentralized population migrations happened and effectively succeeded in taking over entire places, for example the Indo-European migration in general, the expansion of Austronesian in South-East Asia...

This is just an unfalsifiable argument, there is literally nothing I can say or bring forward that will ever convince you, because your a priori assumptions simply takes what happened as a proof thar anything else couldnt happen, that any migration we saw fit a perfect economic calculation that...

there is still no proof for this claim

As always the earlier the POD the easier it is to avert or change something, so getting rid of Christian Emperors as early as possibke after Constatine dies is the goal to achieve. A Julian-likw figure in the 330s would be the ideal scenario

What makes you think Punic spread and declined in this fashion? Wouldn't Punic have gone from the mediterranean island and Iberia? The wiki article on the punic language makes it seem that if not for Augustine we wouldn't have a reason to think it was widespread by 400 CE and especially not...

"These show how at that time Iranian valued justice and welfare for their own people while most civilized nations at that time still had slavery and exploitation of human beings. " This reads like a terribly biased article.

Going from "the Iranians had aversion to slavery" to "the Iranians had different types of slavery, maybe?" kinda just puts a big "No" to the question in the title.

Having it collapse with the Cimbri wars and Mithridatic wars makes more sense IMO.

I don't think this pattern holds up for Slavs, they just migrated everywhere. Also I'm not sure how Bohemia is poorer than Thuringia, or less safe.