What sparked the migration period?
>>784950
Mexico's perennially defective economy sitting right next to the largest in the world, and a government that couldn't find its own ass with both hands and a map.
Glasgow Rangers fans, Ulster unionists and Germans.
>>784950
The Jews.
roman wimmin ripe for cuck
>>784950
A change in the climate of the steppe that forced a tribe to migrate and push out another tribe, setting off a domino effect.
Why were the Goths so lonely?
>>784950
>>786459
Because Sarmatia is really boring.
>>784950
>inb4 Huns
Rome's perceived weakness as a result of its constant civil wars. That is the fundamental reason for it. All other reasons are secondary or contributory to it in some manner.
Why don't you read a book instead of asking dumb questions?
>>785476
More reading anywhere to be found? All wikipedia gives is a short line mentioning that the given reason is debated/doubted.
>>786704
This. /his/ is for memes n shit, not asking actual questions.
We don't even really know if it actually happened. Everything from that period might as well be horseshit due to limited written accounts.
>>786691
Rome's weakness was a reason why the Germans thought they could move into it, but the migration of the Goths, the rise of the Huns, and, potentially worsening climate conditions, provided the actual impetus to move. The Limes had been weak before, but it never usually inspired more than raids or revolts. The German tribes usually didn't migrate unless something forced them to do so.
>>786815
There is plenty of archaeological evidence proving the migrations of various Germanic groups into different areas of the Empire, and there is also linguistic and cultural evidence of it.
The Chinese campaign against the northern nomads set a domino effect that ended with the Goths invading Rome.
>>786875
Insane if true.
>>784950
Climate change. The north got too cold for comfort.
>>786836
>but the migration of the Goths
It was standard fare of life in the barbaricum, tribes were constantly on the move. Or have you forgotten the Teutons and Cimbri as early as the 2nd century B.C? Or Caesar's reasons for invading Gaul?
>the rise of the Huns
Had nowhere near as much of an impetus as scholars traditionally thought it did back in the 18th and 19th centuries. They didn't genocide anybody, they were just another group assuming hegemony over other tribes, are you really going to try and suggest that the Ostrogoths in 376 were refugees and not just economic migrants? The similarities between then and now are hilariously similar.
>potentially worsening climate conditions
I'll give you that, probably did have somewhat of an impact. But I expect that would have mostly just been raiding.
>the Limes had been weak before, but it never usually inspired more than raids or revolts.
They had been weak before, sure, but never to the tune of half of the British and Gallic armies off fighting usurpers far from the Rhine. Plus, in the 3rd century crisis when such weakness had occurred previously the tribes beyond the frontier had not yet coalesced into the larger confederations that would eventually fuck the Empire so, e.g. the Franks, Alamanni etc.
The 406 invasion was mostly a group of warriors chancing it and getting lucky as the imperial army is too busy fighting itself too even try and stop it. The emperor's seeming indifference is what sparked off even more usurpations and Britain's revolt.
>The German tribes usually didn't migrate unless something forced them to do so.
They weren't settled societies, migration was always a fact of life. Hundreds of thousands had emigrated across the frontier into Roman lands previously, Saxons into Britain, Germans into Toxandria, resettlement on the Danube etc. Migrations were no special phenomenon which fucked the empire specifically.
>>786815
There's actually far more accounts from the 4/5th C's than the 3rd.
