tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post1842635604691123475..comments2024-03-09T15:46:44.638+01:00Comments on For what they were... we are: The oldest known plagueMajuhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comBlogger60125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-28999292078867698462015-11-03T08:20:08.461+01:002015-11-03T08:20:08.461+01:00I was thinking on the CONQUEST aspect rather than ...I was thinking on the CONQUEST aspect rather than on the REPLACEMENT one, which actually could never happen without previous conquest. Back to America, in some cases, notably where farmer populations were dense, it did not happen at all or was only partial, needing many many generations (and the 19th century industrial pulse was decisive). This does not just apply to Mexico or Bolivia but also to the USA, where Natives persisted in important numbers until well after the US independence and only active genocide policies could uproot them. The Trail of Tears and active discrimination were (and are even today) much more important than small pox, whose effectiveness gets exhausted after a while, allowing immunized populations to recover... unless other curses fall upon them at the same time. Those curses are normally people armed with guns and laws, foreign guns and foreign laws pointed against them. <br /><br />"I don't think the Aztecs or Incas lacked for size and organization though, at least before contact".<br /><br />Obviously they were the most powerful states in their context, a Copper Age context. When people from outside with Gunpowder Age weapons and a total disregard for what they perceived as primitive heathen barbarism arrived, they had not a chance. Of course Cortés and Pizarro were still very smart in rallying around them the dissidents, who were many, but even if these would have failed new waves would have come and they would have collapsed anyhow. <br /><br />And, once conquered, their own hierarchy and societal rules could be used (after whatever reforms) by the conquerors to establish their provincial administration. After reinforcements arrived, all resistance was futile. There were many rebellions, some even creole ones (Aguirre), but they were all doomed against the most powerful Empire of its time. Only after the empires declined, centuries later, rebellions could begin succeeding, however the demographics, sociology and language of the countries had been changed forever by then. <br /><br />"... perhaps enough to stall it".<br /><br />The Mayas successfully stalled it but it was all in vain, even in spite of the insightful aid of Guerrero: reinforcements keep coming. The only ones who succeeded lived in too remote areas to matter, for example the Mapuches, who exacted a recognition from the Castilian Empire (later ignored by Chile however). In the long run even remoteness and fierce resistance was not enough protection: if it was not the Castilian soldiers, it were the Portuguese enslavers, if it was not the French traders, it were the land-hungry English colonies.... These powers were not looking at the Natives on one-to-one basis but rather competing against each other and Natives were just pawns or obstacles to their goals. <br /><br />While the American conquest was an early episode of the European colonial expansion, the fact is that soon these Western European powers were able to successfully confront everyone on Earth. The early success of Portugal against the Egyptian-Venetian coalition was later countered by Omani expansion but, soon after, Western powers were able to bring to its knees even mighty China. And, if not even China could withstand, what could Chalcolithic realms hope for, really?Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-81443407682515375602015-11-03T02:03:31.877+01:002015-11-03T02:03:31.877+01:00"You seem to have a quite nuanced understandi..."You seem to have a quite nuanced understanding of American history, so who am I to argue." I don't know about that, but sure lol. I definitely agree that Guns, Germs and Steel is overly simplistic. I just think <br /><br />Re: Gallic Wars and the conquest of Iberia - correct me if I'm wrong here, but I don't believe either of those cases involved large scale demographic turnover, did it? Just elite dominance.<br /><br />I don't think the Aztecs or Incas lacked for size and organization though, at least before contact. Not enough to stop the European advance, but perhaps enough to stall it. That's all.Ryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07906194112935320590noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-61159409306840368612015-10-31T02:04:01.010+01:002015-10-31T02:04:01.010+01:00On the English/Hindi thing, I'd point out that...On the English/Hindi thing, I'd point out that English is the official language of Arunachal Pradesh, Nagaland and Meghalaya, and co-official in Goa, Himachal Pradesh, Jammu and Kashmir, Manipur and West Bengal. Of those states, only Himachal Pradesh also has Hindi as an official language. So it seems to depend a lot on your proximity to the Hindi belt. English is probably better described as a superstrate in India IMHO though.Ryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07906194112935320590noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-78403424482103488082015-10-30T16:58:57.010+01:002015-10-30T16:58:57.010+01:00You seem to have a quite nuanced understanding of ...You seem to have a quite nuanced understanding of American history, so who am I to argue. I just meant that it's not the typical "Guns, Germs and Roses" over-simplistic interpretation. Division particularly is a constant of Human History and a very difficult problem to address successfully. That's how slightly bigger and slightly better organized entities almost invariably win. <br /><br />The main exception has been in the latest century or so, popular revolution, which have been able to overcome such hostile odds often, armed usually with communist ideology and guerrilla tactics, but even such actions took place within one ethnicity or nation and almost never across such sociological borders. Ethnic divisions are very natural but they accumulate tensions with neighbors that third parties are often keen to exploit in their advantage. Changing such relations may happen but needs time and when a much more advanced civilization falls upon you almost overnight, you just don't have that time. <br /><br />Even without that technological difference, just look at the Gallic Wars, or the Phoenician-Roman conquest of Iberia: divided tribes could resist heroically but never win. There were no germs and no technological difference of relevance. It was a matter of size and organization. Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-19864542356263210492015-10-29T23:56:45.425+01:002015-10-29T23:56:45.425+01:00I don't disagree with any of that (and there e...I don't disagree with any of that (and there examples of outright genocide in Canadian history too), but what I'm getting at is that much of that political disunity that Europeans exploited was created, or at least worsened, through the spread of disease and fire arms. If one group loses 2/3 of its population to small pox and the measles, it creates a power vaccuum for its neighbours to exploit. And those neighbours had a much easier time of it if they themselves had managed to acquire European firearms. I'm thinking of the Huron in particular as a good example of this, though there was a pretty huge surge in inter-tribal warfare throughout northern North America in response to the fur trade and the spread of firearms and disease that came with it.<br /><br />In the case of Mesoamerica, I don't think disease had much to do with the fall of the Aztec Empire, but it certainly had a lot to do with the lack of effective resistance afterwards. In the case of the Maya, the introduction of malaria was absolutely devastating to the population and immediately preceded the final conquest. Not to mention the Inca, where death to European diseases is what created the succession crisis that led to a civil war and then Spanish conquest.<br />Ryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07906194112935320590noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-26063708785689625002015-10-29T21:57:21.667+01:002015-10-29T21:57:21.667+01:00@Grey: "the early days of farming" were ...@Grey: "the early days of farming" were far behind in the time of Indoeuropean invasions (or Semitic invasions in the case of West Asia, which are roughly contemporary). Civilizations were already beginning to flourish all around and that responds necessarily to more advanced agriculture and widespread trade networks, these well documented. Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-18631712011307737342015-10-29T21:53:32.763+01:002015-10-29T21:53:32.763+01:00I think that excusing behind epidemics is not vali...I think that excusing behind epidemics is not valid. Indigenous nations were divided and colonial powers played with that, as well as with all other tools in their hands (military, settlers, alcohol, religion and diseases). Many Native leaders and nations fought bravely but they could not win in technological and demographic disadvantage: they were fighting in what were basically Copper Age conditions against some of the mightiest powers of proto-industrial Earth. Nobody can win in such circumstances. Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-38319712953434640322015-10-29T21:41:08.014+01:002015-10-29T21:41:08.014+01:00I don't see it that way: invaders clearly took...I don't see it that way: invaders clearly took advantage of rebellions and civil wars, allying with some against the other. That is at least the case in the conquests of the Aztec and Inca Empire. Also, once conquered those empires were more easily subject to Castilian authority by means of partly reproducing the pre-existent domination methods of these two empires. Another story is where there were no empires, for example among the Mayas (who somehow had gotten rid of their rulers centuries earlier), and where conquest was therefore much slower and never fully consolidated (500 years later the conflict is still ongoing in various forms, including often armed rebellion). All these examples refer to where agriculture was intense, and therefore could keep high population densities, something that allowed for the persistence of Native blood more easily, be it as truly Native communities or within the assimilated Mestizo ones. <br /><br />In North America even, the Native nations were much more resilient than you see to acknowledge. 150 years ago the Eastern USA was full of them, however they were forcibly relocated, in what is a true genocide on its own right, to Oklahoma. Sure: epidemics, sometimes actively induced in true genocidal acts, played a role but military enforcement (including brutal massacres) and demographic pressure (aided by Industrial era unprecedented mobility) were the true drivers of the overall genocide. <br /><br />In the Caribbean, which was the first region to suffer the impact of European colonialism, the destruction of the Indigenous nations was mostly driven by military domination an forced slavery. Slavery was the real destructor of the nations, as the De las Casas report clearly underlines. Of course, repeated waves of colonization, often of forced migrants such as African slaves or Canarian forced settlers (which in turn aided to the genocide of the Guanches in the African archipelago and their replacement by a growingly European population) also helped. Epidemics are no doubt an extra but they alone could not wipe entire nations, in many cases not even the whole imperial might could, and many nations still survive. Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-55138570424775975732015-10-29T20:49:02.796+01:002015-10-29T20:49:02.796+01:00"Also IEs appear to have been pioneers in thi..."Also IEs appear to have been pioneers in this model of expansion"<br /><br />Also farmer population density may have been less in the early days of farming.Greyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13398462488549380796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-67150233425805753072015-10-29T20:04:56.388+01:002015-10-29T20:04:56.388+01:00I just wanted to add that while I'm skeptical ...I just wanted to add that while I'm skeptical of this paper in particular, I don't think it's whitewashing to talk about the role disease played in the "success" of European colonialism. It's pretty important to indigenous peoples' discourse. Their ancestors weren't incompetent or weak for failing to effectively resist colonialism. The introduction of European diseases and firearms had completely disrupted their existing political structures. That's not an excuse for anything Europeans did (including deliberately spreading said diseases and firearms). It is I feel a pretty valid excuse for indigenous leaders at the time.Ryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07906194112935320590noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-71552652573661715612015-10-28T19:16:02.963+01:002015-10-28T19:16:02.963+01:00Onur: you know that my problem with you is that yo...Onur: you know that my problem with you is that you are prone to use racial language that others may find offensive and certainly unnecessary and that you stubbornly reject to change your pattern of behavior even when someone (and critically myself) insistently demands a change. <br /><br />I cannot unban you unless you change your attitude what you repeatedly rejected on alleged "scientific language" blah-blah. <br /><br />Hence, <b>for consistency, I have to delete you comment no matter how relevant is</b>. <br /><br />A ban is a ban is a ban. <br /><br />Only a change in the attitude leading to a ban can revoke it.<br /><br />In other cases it is a matter of personality (typically the "wanting to be always right and posting continuosly because: me right, you wrong" syndrome, what I call the "brainy troll") and that cannot be undone, that's a problem for a psychiatrist, not me nor my readers.Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-22657942835479995852015-10-28T11:37:59.203+01:002015-10-28T11:37:59.203+01:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Onur Dincerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05041378853428912894noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-80956805219576236242015-10-28T08:14:57.046+01:002015-10-28T08:14:57.046+01:00I don't have any particular problem with refle...I don't have any particular problem with reflecting here discussions from other sources, including blogs, as long as they are relevant and the source is not abhorrent (a nazi site, for example). You must have misunderstood me, if I ever said something that may sound like what you say. <br /><br />As for what Postneo says, I think it may be very relevant, particularly because it seems to imply that people could survive more easily the bacterium back in those days, but I still need to find the relevant paragraphs in the original paper. Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-70313896028227878962015-10-28T07:58:17.276+01:002015-10-28T07:58:17.276+01:00Ok, i will try :).
I think i should give you the t...Ok, i will try :).<br />I think i should give you the the full conversation (of just three comments btw):<br />postneo said...<br />http://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(15)01322-7 <br />says a couple of high virulence mutations are lacking in these early strains. These developed after the late bronze age<br />Karl_K said...<br />@postneo<br /><br />These bacteria lack the flea associated genes. So they could only be spread by mammal to mammal contact. But this does not mean that they were any less deadly. It spreads through direct contact, but will kill people 90% of the time anyway.<br /><br />The flea transmission was a killer in later cities, where large domestic animals were at a distance.<br /><br />This could have been just as deadly when everyone lived in very close proximity to herds of mammals.<br />postneo said...<br />@kk<br /><br />It's not just the flea mutation. The immune system of the host would have a better shot at fighting back till the flagella expression was suppressed. It seems these mutations became fixed at 97 % in a very short time in the late bronze (age)<br />http://eurogenes.blogspot.in/2015/10/plague-germs-may-have-facilitated.html<br />I know you ask not to bring other blogs discussions here, but i thought its relevant this time :)..<br />Cheers...Nirjhar007https://www.blogger.com/profile/12880827026479135118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-7045249363227437642015-10-28T07:56:49.135+01:002015-10-28T07:56:49.135+01:00This comment has been removed by the author.Nirjhar007https://www.blogger.com/profile/12880827026479135118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-57702165717387008852015-10-28T06:52:50.569+01:002015-10-28T06:52:50.569+01:00My email is publicly available in my Blogger profi...My email is publicly available in my Blogger profile, just remove the "DELETETHIS" anti-spambot protection. <br /><br />BTW, until now I didn't know you had a blog. My bad. <br /><br />"I think those are quite solid points, whats your opinion?"<br /><br />That I don't understand enough to have one. Is he saying that there is evidence in this study suggesting an ongoing evolution of the plague bacterium within the period studied?Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-71808463811759246622015-10-28T06:12:18.309+01:002015-10-28T06:12:18.309+01:00An on the Topic, yes, My Friend Postneo, pointed t...An on the Topic, yes, My Friend Postneo, pointed that the research paper ''says a couple of high virulence mutations are lacking in these early strains. These developed after the late bronze age''<br />also ''It's not just the flea mutation. The immune system of the host would have a better shot at fighting back till the flagella expression was suppressed. It seems these mutations became fixed at 97 % in a very short time in the late bronze''<br />I think those are quite solid points, whats your opinion?.<br />Nirjhar007https://www.blogger.com/profile/12880827026479135118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-3338252607816675102015-10-28T06:04:53.067+01:002015-10-28T06:04:53.067+01:00Maju, I need to contact you, i have several propos...Maju, I need to contact you, i have several proposals for you but need to contact personally, can you please give your mail in my blog? i will not publish of course :).Nirjhar007https://www.blogger.com/profile/12880827026479135118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-70557851862298017862015-10-28T05:56:36.385+01:002015-10-28T05:56:36.385+01:00Well, I don't feel like persecuting this discu...Well, I don't feel like persecuting this discussion anymore, being so extremely off topic. Write a blog, seriously: it seems you have A LOT to say. Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-44612939478939693412015-10-28T05:34:28.805+01:002015-10-28T05:34:28.805+01:00Y-Full's full sequence is relatively useless i...Y-Full's full sequence is relatively useless if they are using the wrong calibration/rate (assuming that there is a "molecular clock" after all, something I find problemantic). When we recalibrate age(CF) to make it 100 Ka old, it seems apparent that (assuming everything else is correct and linearly extrapolable) 50% must be added to every age. That might wo<br />I think you are not thinking that correctly unless aDNA proves otherwise, we should rely on those calculations at the absence of aDNA ,though i also somewhat agree with you also of course!.<br />''LOL, I did. I saw no "research" of relevance, just pontification. Armenians are typical Anatolio-Caucasians, except that they have some Y-DNA that is clearly of European derivation.''<br />He gave papers and links read them, there was no ''Balcan Invasion'' around 1200 BC, Yes the R1b shows European origin but all evidence suggest there that it actually perhaps came from East! YES!!, to know what i'm talking about you have to discuss with him :).<br />BTW here i sign off , you are a daunting man to debate with ;)....Nirjhar007https://www.blogger.com/profile/12880827026479135118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-7744890286742567702015-10-28T05:20:06.535+01:002015-10-28T05:20:06.535+01:00This comment has been removed by the author.Nirjhar007https://www.blogger.com/profile/12880827026479135118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-62213713220321804752015-10-28T05:06:33.758+01:002015-10-28T05:06:33.758+01:00Well, nope: it has clear Swat or Gandhara grave cu...<i>Well, nope: it has clear Swat or Gandhara grave culture elements. Obviously both show a great deal of continuity and we even see in Mittani aDNA (mtDNA) that these warrior elites carried South Asian genetics. Nobody (at least not I) claims for biological replacement but rather for elite conquest. But they also show a great deal of exchange with Central Asia, even before their establishment as such newly defined cultures.</i><br />Absolutely ridiculous, First on Swat, you can see here.<br />https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandhara_grave_culture#Cultural_continuity<br />and Cemetery H was developed internally inside Indus with no outside trail, <br />Your works and assumptions were also discarded elsewhere long ago, i think you kept a blind eye on that too-<br />http://virginiahighlander.blogspot.in/<br />''Indoeuropean branch that shows unique European and Ugrian affinities (in language, not genetics) in comparison to other older Asian branches of the same family. ''<br />Well IE shows great amount of Sumerian, Hurro-Urartian and even Caucasian affinities, Aryan OTOH gave some loanwords to Uralic which probably is related to the BMAC migration to Sintashta area, the basic correspondences which are argued are also found on those language groups, i'm not saying Uralic affinities are non-existing as i'm not blind though its bit hyped to be true, but also i don't neglect the existing strong linguistic affinities of PIE with Sumerian,H-U,Caucasian,Semetic, which are carefully neglected for the sake of Kurgan Hypothesis.<br />''I know they had trade relations but I'm unaware of such "structural origins",''<br />Well obviously you didn't read Giacomos research article on Indo-Iranians as all is described there, you actually went straightaway with Trash and vulgar talking there if i remember correctly , Sintashta is an outlier, which had SC Asian and also Anatolian contribution, read that article carefully again first...Nirjhar007https://www.blogger.com/profile/12880827026479135118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-54171990525561779032015-10-28T04:41:10.416+01:002015-10-28T04:41:10.416+01:00''That's simply impossible: where'...''That's simply impossible: where's the genetic trail?''<br />Actually simply quite possible, they arrived quite late and they were isolated there, tell me what happens when a group comes from some where else and gets isolated? DRIFT!!,anyway,<br /><i>They postulate, that Brahui could only have migrated to Balochistan from central India after 1000 CE. The absence of any older Iranian (Avestan) loanwords in Brahui supports this hypothesis. The main Iranian contributor to Brahui vocabulary, Balochi, is a Northwestern Iranian language, and moved to the area from the west only around 1000 CE.[12] One scholar places the migration аs late as the 13th or 14th century.</i><br />https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahui_language#History<br />''I do not understand the problem, it seems like you just don't do your homework: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Substratum_in_Vedic_Sanskrit''<br />Actually i give people homework on that and teach them the issue! the substratum is first not an indicator of time of IE Arrival, which most likely happened at least in Chalcolithic and secondly its bit exaggerated, there is not a single Dravidian word in Rigveda! and the closest one is ''MIna'' Fish but even that word belongs to Indo-European origin!.<br />http://starling.rinet.ru/cgi-bin/response.cgi?root=config&morpho=0&basename=%5Cdata%5Cie%5Cpiet&first=1&off=&text_proto=&method_proto=substring&ic_proto=on&text_meaning=&method_meaning=substring&ic_meaning=on&text_hitt=&method_hitt=substring&ic_hitt=on&text_tokh=&method_tokh=substring&ic_tokh=on&text_ind=&method_ind=substring&ic_ind=on&text_avest=&method_avest=substring&ic_avest=on&text_iran=&method_iran=substring&ic_iran=on&text_arm=&method_arm=substring&ic_arm=on&text_greek=&method_greek=substring&ic_greek=on&text_slav=&method_slav=substring&ic_slav=on&text_balt=&method_balt=substring&ic_balt=on&text_germ=&method_germ=substring&ic_germ=on&text_lat=&method_lat=substring&ic_lat=on&text_ital=&method_ital=substring&ic_ital=on&text_celt=&method_celt=substring&ic_celt=on&text_alb=&method_alb=substring&ic_alb=on&text_rusmean=&method_rusmean=substring&ic_rusmean=on&text_refer=&method_refer=substring&ic_refer=on&text_comment=&method_comment=substring&ic_comment=on&text_any=*men%C7%9D%28w&method_any=substring&sort=proto&ic_any=on<br />The other developments are easily described as internal developments rather than any substratum influence! like a bit shown here.<br />https://manasataramgini.wordpress.com/2008/05/15/cerebrals-or-retroflexes-in-indo-aryan/<br />I'm giving you references after after references but all you see that i'm arguing without any research? really?.Nirjhar007https://www.blogger.com/profile/12880827026479135118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-77562124268982042982015-10-27T21:41:18.477+01:002015-10-27T21:41:18.477+01:00Yah, agreed on all points. Yah, agreed on all points. Ryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07906194112935320590noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3023805782808412230.post-53373155830490761482015-10-27T19:55:58.031+01:002015-10-27T19:55:58.031+01:00We are usually more or less aware of such migratio...We are usually more or less aware of such migrations or conquests because they do leave a trail on the archaeological registry. For example it is very apparent that the Vinca-Dimini cultural complex is the product of a migration/conquest by people originating in Upper Mesopotamia, surely closely related to Tell Halaf culture. Or we know that the Michelsberg culture in West Germany displaced the LBK-derived Rössen and epi-Rössen cultures, although the precise origins of Michelsberg are blurry. So we can in fact track those older migrations at least in many cases, although admittedly it is less obvious what languages can be associated to them for lack of records (but that also applies to much of the IE expansion anyhow). <br /><br />As for climate change, maybe it was more complicated than you imagine and it was maybe this drying what pushed Semites to invade. Remember that they had no camels, not even horses, so their semi-nomadism was all the time on foot, what is much more limited in their range. Also the "green deserts" would have allowed for more pastoralism than true deserts, quite obviously. While steppe or savanna allow for pastoralism and are poorly suited for farming in most cases, deserts do not (much less without camels). The archaeological evidence for the Circum-Arabian Pastoralist Complex and its precursors like Harifian is limited to semi-arid and not truly arid lands. It is quite plausible that the shrinking of the semi-arid belt actually pushed the nomads to invade the farmlands. Majuhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12369840391933337204noreply@blogger.com