Difference between revisions of "Barbarian" - New World Encyclopedia

From New World Encyclopedia
 
(19 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 +
[[Category:Public]]
 
[[Category:Politics and social sciences]]
 
[[Category:Politics and social sciences]]
 
[[Category:Anthropology]]
 
[[Category:Anthropology]]
[[Category:Submitted]]
 
{{Images OK}}{{Submitted}}{{Contracted}} {{Status}}
 
  
The term '''Barbarian''' was originally used to denote any foreigner of a different culture and language background. While it did not originally have a pejorative connotation, it was used by those of relatively advanced civilizations and thus came to refer to people from more primitive cultures, whose people usually relied on physical strength more than intellect. Today, "barbarian" is used to mean someone violent, primitive, uncouth, or generally uncivilized. Although intellectual advances have been the most valued, there are historical examples in which barbarian cultures and actions contributed to societal progress.
+
{{Copyedited}}{{Paid}}{{Approved}}{{Images OK}}{{Submitted}} {{Status}}
 +
 
 +
The term '''Barbarian''' does not derive from the name of any tribe or cultural group. It is not a name one gives to oneself, rather it is given to others. The [[Ancient Greece|Greeks]] originally used the term to denote any foreigner of a different culture and language background. While it did not initially have a pejorative connotation, it was used by those of relatively advanced civilizations to describe others, who were considered less civilized. Thus, the term came to refer to people from more primitive cultures, whose people usually relied on physical strength more than intellect. Today, "barbarian" is used to describe someone using excessive violence without considering other options.  
 +
 
 +
Although barbarian cultures generally worked against the advancement of civilization, there are historical examples in which barbarian cultures and actions contributed to societal progress. In particular, when a culture has become stagnant and is in decline, pressure from barbarians can stimulate innovation and bring new energy, or can hasten the demise of a society that is seriously corrupt.
  
 
== Origin of the term ==
 
== Origin of the term ==
The term "barbarian" is not derived from the name of any tribe or cultural group; there is no country called "barbar." Instead, the [[Berber]]s, a group of whom were originally known as [[Numidia|Numidians]], received the name "Berber" from the Roman term ''barbara'' or barbarian.
+
The term "barbarian" is not derived from the name of any tribe or cultural group; there is no country called "barbar." The word comes from the [[Greek]] language, and was used to connote any foreigner not sharing a recognized culture or language with the speaker or writer employing the term. The word was probably formed by imitation of the incomprehensible sounds of a foreign language (“bar-bar”). Originally, it was not a derogatory term; it simply meant anything that was not Greek, including language, people or customs. Later, as the Greeks encountered more foreigners, some of whom learned Greek but spoke with a strange accent, the term took on the connotation of primitive and uncivilized. When the Greek civilization and culture was threatened by others (e.g. [[Persian]] or [[Goths|Gothic]] tribes) the connotation of violence was added. The [[Romans]] inherited this view from the Greeks, and in their encounters with different tribes across Europe usually called those tribes “barbarian.” However, being war- and conquest-oriented, the Romans admired barbarians as fearless and brave warriors.
  
The word "barbarian" comes from the [[Greek]] language, and was used to connote any foreigner not sharing a recognized culture or language with the speaker or writer employing the term. The word was probably formed by imitation of the incomprehensible sounds of a foreign language (“bar-bar”). Originally, it was not a derogatory term; it simply meant anything that was not Greek, including language, people or customs. Later, as the Greeks encountered more foreigners, some of whom learned Greek but spoke with a strange accent, the term took on the connotation of uncivilized.
+
== Historical perspective ==
 +
As the [[Roman Empire]] spread throughout [[Europe]] and [[Northern Africa]] they encountered various tribes and peoples. Some fought violently against the invading Roman armies, and continued raiding and looting after Roman conquest of their homelands. The Romans, with their well-organized military, regarded these violent and uncouth enemy tribes as barbarians.  
  
== Historical perspective ==
+
Although critical of their primitive culture, the Romans respected the bravery and fighting ability of barbarians. In the latter stages of the Roman Empire, around the fourth and fifth centuries <small>C.E.</small>, the Romans even started to recruit young barbarian males to serve in the Roman army, a practice known as the ''barbarization of the Roman Empire''. Gothic and [[Vandals|Vandal]] soldiers were employed to protect the empire's outer borders. However, this encouraged barbarians to attack the Romans more, due to the perceived weakness that barbarization produced, and, in the long run, aided in the final breakdown of the empire.
Throughout history, any tribe referred to as barbaric was automatically regarded as primitive, violent, and uncivilized. Such a stigma was mostly due to Greek views on those who threatened Greek civilization and culture (e.g. [[Persian]] or [[Gothic]] tribes). The Romans inherited this view from the Greeks, and in their encounters with different tribes across Europe usually called those tribes “barbarian.” However, being war- and conquest-oriented, the Romans admired barbarians as fearless and brave warriors. [[Attila the Hun]] is among the best known leader of such barbarians. In the latter stages of the Roman Empire, around the 4th and 5th centuries CE, the Romans even started to recruit young barbarian males to serve in the Roman army, a practice known as the ''barbarization of the Roman Empire''. Gothic and [[Vandal]] soldiers were employed to protect the empire's outer borders. However, this encouraged barbarians to attack the Romans more, due to the perceived weakness that barbarization produced, and, in the long run, aided in the final breakdown of the empire.  
+
 
 +
The following are examples of some of the tribes referred to as barbarian.
  
 
===Berbers===
 
===Berbers===
The '''Berbers''' (also called '''Imazighen''', "free men", singular '''Amazigh''') are an [[ethnic group]] indigenous to [[Northwest Africa]], speaking the [[Berber languages]] of the [[Afroasiatic languages|Afroasiatic family]]. There are between 14 and 25 million speakers of Berber languages in [[North Africa]] (see [[Berber languages#Population|population estimation]]), principally concentrated in [[Morocco]] and [[Algeria]] but with smaller communities as far east as [[Egypt]] and as far south as [[Burkina Faso]].
+
The term "barbarian" does not come from the name of these people. Instead, the [[Berber]]s, a group of whom were originally known as [[Numidia|Numidians]], received the name "Berber" from the Roman term ''barbara'' or barbarian when they first encountered Romans.
  
The Berbers have lived in North Africa for as far back as records of the area go. References to them occur frequently in ancient Egyptian, Greek, and Roman sources. Berber groups are first mentioned in writing by the [[ancient Egypt]]ians during the [[Predynastic Period of Egypt|Predynastic Period]], and during the [[New Kingdom]] the Egyptians later fought against the [[Meshwesh]] and [[Lebu]] (Libyans) [[tribes]] on their western borders. Many Egyptologists think that from about [[945 B.C.E.]] the Egyptians were ruled by Meshwesh immigrants who founded the [[Twenty-second dynasty of Egypt|Twenty-second Dynasty]] under [[Shoshenq I]], beginning a long period of Berber rule in Egypt, although others posit different origins for these dynasties, including [[Nubia]]n ones.  The [[Byzantine Empire|Byzantine]] chroniclers often complain of the ''Mazikes'' (Amazigh) raiding outlying monasteries, and berbers long remained the main population of the [[Western Desert]] well into the Nineteenth century.
+
The Berbers have lived in North Africa for as far back as records of the area go. References to them occur frequently in ancient Egyptian, Greek, and Roman sources. The [[Byzantine Empire|Byzantine]] chroniclers often complain of the ''Mazikes'' (Amazigh) raiding outlying monasteries.
 
 
For many centuries the Berbers inhabited the coast of North Africa from Egypt to the Atlantic Ocean. In historical times, they have expanded south into the [[Sahara]] (displacing earlier black African populations such as the [[Azer]] and [[Bafour]]), and have in turn been mainly culturally assimilated in much of North Africa by [[Arab]]s, particularly following the incursion of the [[Banu Hilal]] in the 11th century.
 
  
 
===Goths===
 
===Goths===
[[Image:800px-Illus0381.jpg|right|thumb|300px|''Invasion of the Goths'': a late [[19th century]] painting by O. Fritsche portrays the Goths as cavalrymen.]]
 
 
The '''Goths''' were an [[East Germanic tribe]] which according to their own traditions originated in [[Scandinavia]] (specifically [[Gotland]] and [[Götaland]]). They migrated southwards and conquered parts of the [[Roman empire]].
 
 
They were settled for some time in the [[Vistula Basin]]. From there they migrated towards the south-east. They battled with, and temporarily subjugated, the ancestors of the [[Slavs]], who lived between the [[Baltic Sea]] and the [[Black Sea]] and ultimately settled in '[[Scythia]]' a vast undefined region that includes modern [[Ukraine]] and [[Belarus]]. A united tribe until the third century, it was during that period that they split into the eastern Goths or [[Ostrogoths]] and the western Goths or [[Visigoths]].
 
  
Though many of the fighting nomads who followed them were to prove more bloody, the Goths were feared because the captives they took in battle were sacrificed to their god of war, [[Tyz]] [http://www.northvegr.org/lore/grimmst/009_03.php](the one-Handed [[Tyr]]), and the captured arms hung in trees as a token-offering. Their kings and priests came from a separate aristocracy and were honored as gods, according to [[Jordanes]]' ''[[Getica]]'' a condensation of the lost twelve-volume history of the Goths written in Italy by [[Cassiodorus]].  
+
The [[Goths]] were an East Germanic tribe which originated in [[Scandinavia]] (specifically [[Gotland]] and [[Götaland]]). They migrated southwards and conquered parts of the Roman Empire.
  
A force of Goths launched one of the first major "barbarian" invasions of the Roman Empire in 267 ([[Hermannus Contractus]], quoting [[Eusebius of Caesarea|Eusebius]], has ''"263: [[Macedon]]ia, [[Greece|Graecia]], [[Pontus]], [[Asia Minor|Asia]] et aliae provinciae depopulantur per Gothos"''). A year later, they suffered a devastating defeat at the [[Battle of Naissus]] and were driven back across the [[Danube River]] by 271. This group then settled on the other side of the Danube from Roman territory and established an independent kingdom centered on the abandoned Roman province of [[Dacia]], as the [[Visigoth]]s. In the meantime, the Goths still in [[Ukraine]] established a vast and powerful kingdom along the Black Sea. This group became known as the [[Ostrogoth]]s.
+
Though many of the fighting nomads who followed them were to prove more bloody, the Goths were feared because the captives they took in battle were sacrificed to their god of war, [[Tyz]] [http://www.northvegr.org/lore/grimmst/009_03.php](the one-Handed [[Tyr]]), and the captured arms hung in trees as a token-offering.  
  
The Goths were briefly reunited under one crown in the early sixth century under the Ostrogothic king [[Theodoric the Great]], who became regent of the Visigothic kingdom for nearly two decades.
+
A force of Goths launched one of the first major "barbarian" invasions of the Roman Empire. ([[Hermannus Contractus]], quoting [[Eusebius of Caesarea|Eusebius]], has ''"263: [[Macedonia]], Graecia, [[Pontus]], [[Asia Minor|Asia]] et aliae provinciae depopulantur per Gothos"''). A year later, however, they suffered a devastating defeat at the [[Battle of Naissus]] and were driven back across the [[Danube River]].
 
 
{{Credit2|Berbers|29609342|Goths|29607614}}}
 
  
 
===Huns===
 
===Huns===
'''Hun''' is a term that refers to a specific group of [[Central Asian]] nomadic tribes, who appeared in Europe in the 4th century.  It has also become a more general term for any number of Central Asian [[equestrian nomads]] or semi-nomads. Most of these peoples are recorded by neighboring peoples to the south, east, and west as having occupied Central Asia roughly from the late 1st century to the mid-5th century.
 
  
 +
[[Image:800px-Checa-HunCharge.jpg|right|thumb|300px|The Huns, led by Attila (right, foreground), ride into [[Italy]].]]
  
 +
The [[Huns]] were a nomadic people who invaded Europe and built an enormous empire, defeating the Ostrogoths and Visigoths, and reaching the border of the Roman empire. They were primitive people, inspiring great fear throughout Europe as formidable warriors, skilled at archery and horsemanship, carrying out ferocious and unpredictable charges in battle.
  
Dionisus Periegetes talks of people who may be Huns living next to the Caspian Sea in 200 C.E. which is coroborated in 214 C.E. by Choronei Mozes in his "History of Armenia" who introduces the '''Hunni''' near the Sarmatians and goes on to describe how they captured the city of Balk (which is Kush in Armenian) sometime between 194 and 214 explaining why the Greeks call that city '''Hunuk'''. With the [[Xiongnu]] out of the way, we meet a century of lull, then following attempts by the Liu family of [[Tiefu]] Huns to re-establish Hunnish states in western China (see [[Han Zhao]]) Chionites (OIONO/Xiyon) appear on the scene in Transoxiana as Kidara's Huns begin to press on the Kushans in 320 and the Jie ethnicity Hou/[[Later Zhao]] kingdom competes against the Liu family. Back west, the Romans invited the Huns east of the Ukraine to settle Pannonia in 361 and in 372, under the leadership of Balimir their king, the Huns push toward the west and defeat the Alans. Back east again, in the early 5th century [[Tiefu|Tiefu Xia]] is the last Hunnish dynasty in Western China and we meet the '''[[Alchon]]''' and '''[[Hunas|Huna]]''' in [[Afghanistan]] and [[Pakistan]]. At this point deciphering Hunnish histories for the multi-linguist becomes easier with relatively well documented events in Byzantine, Armenian, Iranian, Indian and Chinese sources.
+
[[Image:Atli.jpg|thumb|left|Atli. From an illustration to the ''Poetic Edda''.]]  
  
 +
[[Attila the Hun]] ca. 406&ndash;453) was the last and most powerful king of the Huns. He reigned over what was then Europe's largest empire, stretching from Central [[Europe]] to the [[Black Sea]] and from the [[Danube|Danube River]] to the [[Baltic Sea|Baltic]]. During his rule he was among the direst enemies of the Eastern and Western Roman Empires: he invaded the [[Balkans]] twice and encircled [[Constantinople]] in the second invasion. He marched through [[France]] as far as [[Orleans]] before being turned back at [[Battle of Chalons|Chalons]]; and he drove the western emperor [[Valentinian III]] from his capital at [[Ravenna]] in 452.
  
 +
Though his empire died with him, and he left no remarkable legacy, Attila has become a legendary figure in the history of Europe. He is known in Western history and tradition as the grim "Scourge of God", and his name has become a byword for cruelty and barbarism. Some of this may arise from a conflation of his traits, in the popular imagination, with those perceived in later warlords such as the [[Mongol]] [[Genghis Khan]] and [[Timur|Tamerlane]]: all run together as cruel, clever, and sanguinary lovers of battle and pillage. The reality of his character may be more complex. The historical context of Attila's life played a large part in determining his later public image: in the waning years of the western Empire, his conflicts with Aetius (often called the "last of the Romans") and the strangeness of his culture both helped dress him in the mask of the ferocious barbarian and enemy of civilization, as he has been portrayed in any number of films and other works of art. The Germanic epics in which he appears offer more nuanced depictions: he is both a noble and generous ally, as Etzel in the ''Nibelungenlied'', and a cruel miser, as Atli in the ''Volsunga Saga'' and the ''Poetic Edda''.
  
Huns made an appearance in Europe in the Fourth Century AD, where the Romans invited them to settle [[Pannonia]] in 361. 
+
=== Magyars ===
  
The establishment of the first Hun state marks one of the first well-documented appearances of the culture of [[horseback migration]] in history. Under the leadership of [[Attila the Hun]], these tribes people achieved superiority over their rivals (most of them highly cultured) by their state of military readiness, high mobility, and weapons like the [[Hun bow]].
+
[[Image:800px-Arpadfeszty.jpg|thumb|right|320px|Prince Árpád crossing the Carpathians.]]  
  
Attila's Huns, like the eastern [[Xiongnu]], incorporated groups of unrelated tributary peoples. In the European case [[Alans]], [[Gepids]], [[Scrir]], [[Rugians]], [[Sarmatians]], [[Slavs]] and especially [[Goths|Gothic tribes]] all united under the Hun family military elite. Attila's Huns eventually settled [[Pannonia]].
+
The [[Magyars]] are an ethnic group living primarily in [[Hungary]] and neighboring areas, and speaking a language of the [[Finno-Ugric]] family.  
  
The memory of the Hunnish invasion was transmitted orally among the [[Germanic tribes]] and is an important component in the [[Old Norse]] ''[[Völsunga saga]]'' and ''[[Hervarar saga]]'', and the [[Old German]] ''[[Nibelungenlied]]'', all portraying events in the [[Migrations period]], almost one millennium before their recordings. In the ''Hervarar saga'', the Goths make first contact with the bow-wielding Huns and meet them in an epic battle on the plains of the Danube. In the ''Völsunga saga'' and the ''Nibelungenlied'', king Attila (''[[Atli]]'' in Norse and ''[[Etzel]]'' in German) defeat the Frankish king [[Sigebert I]] (''[[Sigurðr]]'' or ''[[Siegfried]]'') and the Burgundian king [[Guntram|Guntram I]] (''[[Gunnar]]'' or ''[[Gunther]]''), but is subsequently assassinated by Queen [[Fredegund]] (''[[Gudrun]]'' or ''[[Kriemhild]]''), the sister of the latter and wife of the former.
+
Originally the Magyars were situated to the east of the [[Ural Mountains]] in [[Siberia]], where they hunted and fished and developed horse breeding and riding. They migrated southward and westward, and in 896, under the leadership of [[Árpád]] the Magyars crossed the [[Carpathians]] to enter the Carpathian Basin.  
  
===Magyars===
+
The century between their arrival from the eastern European plains and the consolidation of the Kingdom of Hungary in 1001 was dominated by Magyar pillaging campaigns across Europe, from ([[Denmark]]) to the [[Iberian peninsula]]. Their merciless looting caused them to be known as the "scourge of Europe."
'''Magyars''' are an [[ethnic group]] primarily associated with [[Hungary]]. In English they are sometimes called '''Hungarians'''.
 
 
 
 
 
The Magyar leader [[Árpád]] is believed to have led the Hungarians into the [[Carpathian Basin]] in [[896]]. Magyar expansion was checked at the [[Battle of Lechfeld]] in [[955]]. Hungarian settlement in the area became approved by the [[Pope]] by the crowning of [[Stephen I of Hungary|Stephen I the Saint]] (''Szent István'') in [[1001]] when the leaders accepted [[Christianity]]. The century between the Magyars' arrival from the eastern European plains and the consolidation of the [[Kingdom of Hungary]] in 1001 were dominated by pillaging campaigns across Europe, from Dania ([[Denmark]]) to the [[Iberian peninsula]] ([[Spain]]).
 
 
 
At the Hungarian conquest, the Hungarian nation numbered between 250,000 and 450,000 people. The Slavic population of the region (and remnants of the Avars in the southwest) was also assimilated by the Magyars, except those living approximately in present-day [[Slovakia]] (the ancestors of the [[Slovaks|Slovak people]]) and those living in present-day [[Croatia]]. Croatia joined the Kingdom in [[1102]].
 
 
 
 
 
Hun names like [[Attila]] and [[Réka]] are still popular among Hungarians, and forms derived from Latin ''Hungaria'' are used like in the racetrack [[Hungaroring]] (mostly due to the strong English language pressure in tourism and international matters).
 
 
 
''Magyar'' is today simply the Hungarian word for Hungarian. In English and many other languages, however, Magyar is used instead of Hungarian in certain (mainly historical) contexts, usually to distinguish ethnic Hungarians (i.e. the Magyars) from the other nationalities living in the Hungarian kingdom.
 
 
 
 
 
The origin of the Hungarians (more correctly Magyars) is partly disputed. The most widely accepted [[Finno-Ugric languages|Finno-Ugric]] theory from the late 18th century is based primarily on linguistic and ethnographical arguments, while it is criticised by some as relying too much on linguistics. There are also other theories stating that the Magyars are descendants of [[Scythia]]ns, [[Huns]], [[Turkic people|Turks]], [[Eurasian Avars|Avars]], and/or [[Sumer]]ians. These are primarily based on medieval legends &ndash; whose authenticity and scientific reliability is strongly questionable &ndash; and non-systematic linguistic similarities. Most scholars therefore dismiss these claims as mere speculation.
 
 
 
According to this theory, in the 4th millennium B.C.E., some of the earliest settlements of the [[Finno-Ugric languages|Finno-Ugric]]-speaking peoples were situated east of the [[Ural Mountains]], where they [[hunting|hunted]] and [[fishing|fished]]. From there, the Ugrians, i.e., the ancestors of the Magyars, were settled in the [[wood-steppe]] parts of western [[Siberia]] (i.e. to the east of the [[Ural Mountains|Urals]]) &ndash; from [[circa|c.]] 2000 B.C.E. onwards at least. Their settlements were identical with the north-western part of the [[Andronovo Culture]]. Some more advanced tribes coming from the southern steppes taught them how to do agriculture, breed cattle and produce [[bronze]] objects. Around 1500 B.C.E., they started to breed [[horse]]s and horse riding became one of their typical activities.
 
 
 
Due to climatic changes in the early 1st millennium B.C.E., the Ugrian subgroup known as the [[Ob-Ugrians]] &ndash; until then living more in the north - moved to the lower [[Ob River]], while the Ugrian subgroup being the ancestor of the proto-Magyars  remained in the south and  became [[nomad]]ic herdsmen. From the definitive departure of the Ob-Ugrians (around [[500 B.C.E.]]), the ancestors of present-day Magyars can be considered a separate ethnic group &ndash; the proto-Magyars. During the following centuries, the proto-Magyars still lived in the wood-steppes and steppes southeast of the Ural Mountains, and they were immediate neighbours of and were strongly influenced by the ancient [[Sarmatians]].
 
 
 
Bashkiria and the Khazar khaganate (4th century &ndash; c. 830 C.E.)
 
In the 4th and 5th centuries AD, the Proto-Magyars moved to the west of the Ural Mountains to the area between the southern Ural Mountains and the [[Volga River]] ([[Bashkortostan|Bashkiria]], or [[Bashkortostan]]).
 
 
 
In the early 8th century, a part of the proto-Magyars moved to the [[Don River, Russia|Don River]] (to a territory between the Volga, the Don and the [[Seversky Donets|Donets]]), a territory later called Levedia. The descendants of those proto-Magyars who stayed in Bashkiria were seen in Bashkiria as late as in [[1241]].
 
Indeed, many historical references related both the Magyars (Hungarians) and the Bashkirs as two branches of the same nation. However, modern Bashkirs are quite different from their original stock, largely decimated during the [[Mongol invasion of Europe|Mongol invasion]] (13th century), and assimilated into [[Turkic people]]s.
 
 
 
The proto-Magyars around the Don River were subordinates of the [[Khazars|Khazar]] [[khagan]]ate. Their neighbours were the archaeological [[Saltov Culture]], i.e. [[Bulgars]] (Proto-Bulgarians, descendants of the [[Onogurs]]) and the [[Alans]], from whom they learned gardening, elements of cattle breeding and of agriculture. The Bulgars and Magyars shared a long-lasting relationship in [[Khazaria]], either by alliance or rivalry. The system of 2 rulers (later known as [[kende]] and [[gyula]]) is also thought to be a major inheritance from the Khazars. Tradition holds that the Magyars were organized in a confederacy of seven tribes called ''Jenő'', ''Kér'', ''Keszi'', ''Kürt-Gyarmat'', ''Megyer'' (Magyar), ''Nyék'', and ''Tarján''.
 
 
 
Etelköz (c. 830 &ndash; c. 895)
 
Around [[830]], a civil war broke out in the Khazar khaganate. As a result, three [[Kabar]] tribes out of the Khazars joined the Proto-Magyars and they moved to what the Magyars call the [[Etelköz]], i.e. the territory between the [[Carpathian Mountains|Carpathians]] and the [[Dnieper River]] (today's [[Ukraine]]). Around [[854]], the Proto-Magyars had to face a first attack by the [[Pechenegs]]. (According to other sources, the reason for the departure of the Proto-Magyars to Etelköz was the attack of the Pechenegs.) Both the Kabars and earlier the [[Bulgars]] may have taught the Magyars their [[Turkic languages]]; according to the Finno-Ugric theory, this is used to account for at least 300 Turkic words and names still in modern Hungarian. The new neighbours of the Proto-Magyars were the [[Vikings]] and the eastern [[Slavs]]. Archaeological findings suggest that the Proto-Magyars entered into intense interaction with both groups. From [[862]] onwards, the proto-Magyars (already referred to as the ''Ungri'') along with their allies, the Kabars, started a series of looting raids from the Etelköz to the Carpathian Basin — mostly against the [[Franks|Eastern Frankish Empire]] ([[Germany]]) and [[Great Moravia]], but also against the [[Balaton principality]] and [[Bulgaria]].
 
 
 
Entering the Carpathian Basin (after 895)
 
[[Image:800px-Arpadfeszty.jpg|thumb|right|320px|Prince Árpád is crossing the Carpathians. A detail of [[Árpád Feszty]] and assistants' vast (over 8000 m<sup>2</sup>) canvas, painted to celebrate the 1000th anniversary of the Magyar conquest of Hungary, now displayed at Ópusztaszer National Memorial Site in Hungary]]
 
In [[895]]/[[896]], probably under the leadership of [[Árpád]], a part of them crossed the Carpathians to enter the [[Carpathian basin]]. The tribe called Magyars (''Megyer'') was the leading tribe of the Magyar alliance that conquered the center of the basin. At the same time (c. 895), the proto-Magyars in Etelköz were attacked by [[Bulgaria]] (due to the involvement of the proto-Magyars in the Bulgaro-[[Byzantine Empire|Byzantine]] war of 894-896), and then by their old enemies, the Pechenegs. It is uncertain whether or not those conflicts were the cause of the Magyar departure from Etelköz.
 
 
 
In the Carpathian Basin, the Magyars initially occupied the Great Moravian territory at the upper/middle [[Tisza]] river &ndash; a scarcely populated territory, where, according to Arabian sources, Great Moravia used to send its criminals, and where the [[Roman Empire]] had settled the [[Iazyges]] centuries earlier. From there, they intensified their looting raids all over continental Europe. In [[900]], they moved from the upper Tisza river to Transdanubia ([[Pannonia]]), which later became the core of the arising Hungarian state. Their allies, the Kabars, probably led by [[Kursan]], probably settled in the region around [[Bihar (county)|Bihar]]. Upon entering the Carpathian basin, the Magyars found a largely Slavic population there, such as the [[Bulgarians]], [[Slovaks]], [[Slovenians]], [[Croats]] etc., and minor remnants of the [[Eurasian Avars|Avars]] (in the southwest). Influenced by the Slavic population of this territory, the Magyars gradually changed their pastoral way of life to an agricultural one, and borrowed hundreds of Slavic words. See [[History of Hungary]] for a continuation, and [[Hungary before the Magyars]] for the background.
 
 
 
Many of the "proto-Magyars", however, remained to the north of the Carpathians after 895/896, as archaeological findings e.g. in [[Poland|Polish]] [[Przemysl]] suggest. They seem to have joined the other Magyars in 900. There is also a consistent Hungarian population in [[Transylvania]] that is historically not related to the Magyars led by Árpád: the [[Székely]]s, the main ethnic component of the Hungarian minority in Romania. They are fully acknowledged as Magyars. The Székely people's origin, and in particular the time of their settlement in Transylvania, is a matter of historical controversy (see '''[[Székely]]''' for details).
 
 
 
 
 
{{Credit2|Huns|29676059|Magyars|29427456}}
 
  
 
===Picts===
 
===Picts===
  
 +
The [[Picts]] were a group of pre-[[Celt|Celtic]] tribes that lived in [[Caledonia]], which is now the part of [[Scotland]] north of the [[River Forth]]. During the Roman occupation of [[United Kingdom|Britain]], the Picts continually attacked [[Hadrian's Wall]].
  
The term '''Picts''' refers to a group of pre-[[Celt|Celtic]] tribes that[[Classical antiquity| Mediterranean classical-era]] writers said lived in [[Caledonia]], which is now part of [[Scotland]]. This area was found north of the [[River Forth]] in northern [[Britain]].
+
''Picti'' is usually taken to mean ''painted'' or ''tattooed'' in [[Latin]]. [[Julius Caesar]] mentions the British Celtic custom of body painting in Book V of his ''[[The Gallic Wars|Gallic Wars]]'', stating ''Omnes vero se Britanni vitro inficiunt, quod caeruleum efficit colorem, atque hoc horridiores sunt in pugna aspectu''; which means: "In fact all Britanni stain themselves with vitrum, which produces a dark blue color, and by this means they are more terrifying to face in battle…" Alternatively, the name Pict may be of Celtic origin. Legends about the Picts also include mention of possible [[Scythian]] origins&mdash;linking them with another remote pre-literate people. It should also be noted that Roman and Medieval scholars tended to ascribe a Scythian origin to any barbarian people (including the Scots and Goths) in order to emphasize their barbarity and ‘otherness.
 
 
''Pict'' first appears in a [[panegyric]] written by [[Eumenius]] in 297 C.E. Although ''Picti'' is usually taken to mean ''painted'' or ''tattooed'' in [[Latin]], the term may have a Celtic origin. <!-- e.g. the Pictones of the Loire valley —> The [[Goidelic]] Celts called the Picts ''[[Cruithne (people)|cruithne]]'' (e.g. [[Old Irish]] ''cru(i)then-túath'', based on the Old Irish root ''cruth'') and the [[Brythonic]] Celts knew them as ''prydyn'' (e.g. [[Early Welsh]] *kwriteno-teutā, or the more modern ''pryd'').
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Legends about the Picts also include mention of possible [[Scythian]] origins &mdash; linking them with another remote pre-literate people.  Again, lack of information about the Pictish language makes it difficult to evaluate these legends.  It should also be noted that Roman and Medieval scholars tended to ascribe a Scythian origin to any [[barbarian]] people (including the [[Scots (ethnic group)|Scots]] and [[Goths]]) in order to emphasise their barbarity and 'otherness'.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Popular etymology has long interpreted the name ''Pict'' as if it derived from the Latin the word ''Picti'' meaning "painted folk" or possibly "tattooed ones"; and this may relate to the Welsh word ''Pryd'' meaning  "to mark" or "to draw". [[Julius Caesar]], who never went near Pictland, mentions the British Celtic custom of body painting in Book V of his ''[[The Gallic Wars | Gallic Wars]]'', stating ''Omnes vero se Britanni vitro inficiunt, quod caeruleum efficit colorem, atque hoc horridiores sunt in pugna aspectu''; which means: "In fact all Britanni stain themselves with vitrum, which produces a dark blue colour, and by this means they are more terrifying to face in battle;"
 
 
 
Linguists generally translate the Latin word ''vitro'' as "with [[woad]]". The Latin phrase “vitro inficiunt” could very well have meant “dye themselves with glazes” or “infect themselves with glass”. This could have described a scarification ritual which left dark blue [[scar]]s, or formed a direct reference to [[tattoo]]ing. Subsequent commentators may have displaced the 1st-century B.C.E. southern practices (of the ''Brittani'', a tribe south of the [[Thames]]) to the northern peoples in an attempt to explain the name ''Picti'', which came into use only in the 3rd century AD. Julius Caesar himself, commenting in his ''Gallic Wars'' on the tribes from the areas where Picts (later) lived, states that they have “designs carved into their faces by iron”. If they used [[woad]], then it probably penetrated under the skin as a tattoo. More likely, the Celts used copper for blue tattoos (they had plenty of it) and soot-ash carbon for black. Further study of [[bog body|bog bodies]] may provide more information on the specific tattooing techniques (if any) used by the Picts.
 
  
 
===Vandals===
 
===Vandals===
  
 +
The [[Vandals]] were an East Germanic tribe that entered the late Roman Empire during the fifth century. They traveled through Europe until they met resistance from the [[Franks]], who populated and controlled the Roman possessions in northern [[Gaul]]. Although they were victorious, 20,000 Vandals died in the resulting battle. They then crossed the [[Rhine River]], invading Gaul. The Vandals plundered their way westward and southward through [[Aquitaine]], finally crossing the [[Pyrenees]] mountain range into the [[Iberian Peninsula]]. The Vandals may have given their name to the province of [[Andalusia]], in modern [[Spain]], where they temporarily settled before pushing on to [[Africa]], where they created a state, centered on the city of [[Carthage]].
  
The '''Vandals''' were an [[East Germanic tribe]] that entered the late [[Roman Empire]] during the [[5th century]] and created a state in [[North Africa]], centered on the city of [[Carthage]]. The Vandals may have given their name to the province of [[Andalusia]] (originally, ''Vandalusia'', then ''Al-Andalus''), in modern [[Spain]], where they temporarily settled before pushing on to [[Africa]].
+
In 455, the Vandals attacked and took Rome. They plundered the city for two weeks, departing with countless valuables. The term "vandalism" survives as a legacy of this barbaric plunder and senseless destruction.
 
 
The [[Goths|Goth]] [[Theodoric the Great]], king of the [[Ostrogoths]] and regent of the [[Visigoths]], was allied by marriage with the Vandals, as well as with the [[Burgundians]] and the [[Franks]] under [[Clovis I]].
 
 
 
 
 
Similarity of names have suggested homelands for the Vandals in [[Norway]] (Hallingdal) [[Sweden]] ([[Vendel]]) or [[Denmark]] ([[Vendsyssel]]). The Vandals are assumed to have crossed the Baltic into what is today Poland somewhere in the [[2nd century B.C.E.]], and have settled in [[Silesia]] from around [[120 B.C.E.]]. [[Gaius Cornelius Tacitus|Tacitus]] recorded their presence between the [[Oder]] and [[Vistula]] rivers in ''Germania'' ([[98|AD 98]]) corroborated by later historians. According to [[Jordanes]], they and the [[Rugians]] were displaced by the arrival of the [[Goths]]. This tradition supports the identification of the Vandals with the [[Przeworsk culture]], since the Gothic [[Wielbark culture]] seems to have replaced a branch of that culture.
 
 
 
 
 
The two subdivisions of the Vandals were the [[Silingi]]  and the [[Hasdingi]]. The Silingi lived in an area recorded for centuries as ''Magna Germania'', now  [[Silesia]]. In the [[2nd century]], the [[Hasdingi]], led by the kings [[Raus]] and [[Rapt]] (or Rhaus and Raptus) moved south, and first attacked the [[Roman Empire|Romans]] in the lower Danube area, then made peace and settled in western [[Dacia]] ([[Romania]]) and Roman [[Hungary]].
 
 
 
 
 
The Vandals travelled west along the Danube without much difficulty, but when they reached the Rhine, they met resistance from the [[Franks]], who populated and controlled the Roman possessions in northern [[Gaul]]. 20,000 Vandals, including Godigisel himself, died in the resulting battle, but then with the help of the Alans they managed to defeat the Franks, and on [[December 31]], [[406]] the Vandals crossed the [[Rhine]] to invade Gaul. Under Godigisel's son [[Gunderic]], the Vandals plundered their way westward and southward through [[Aquitaine]].
 
 
 
 
 
In October [[409]] they crossed the [[Pyrenees]] mountain range into the [[Iberian peninsula]]. There they received land from the Romans, as [[foederati]], in [[Gallaecia]] (Northwest) and [[Hispania Baetica]] (South), while the [[Alans]] got lands in [[Lusitania]] (West) and the region around [[Carthago Nova]]. Still, the [[Suebi]], who also controlled part of Gallaecia, and the [[Visigoths]], who invaded Iberia before receiving lands in [[Septimania]] (Southern France), and crushed the Alans, whose surviving remnant hailed Gunderic<!--or Gaiseric?—> as their king.
 
 
 
 
 
Gunderic's half brother [[Geiseric]] started building a Vandal fleet. In [[429]], after becoming king, Geiseric crossed the [[Strait of Gibraltar]] and moved east toward [[Carthage]]. In [[435]] the Romans granted them some territory in Northern Africa, yet in [[439]] Carthage fell to the Vandals. Geiseric then built the Kingdom of the Vandals and Alans into a powerful state (the capital was [[Saldae]]), and conquered [[Sicily]], [[Sardinia]], [[Corsica]] and the [[Balearic Islands]].
 
 
 
 
 
In [[455]], the Vandals took [[Rome]] and plundered the city for two weeks starting [[June 2]]. They departed with countless valuables, spoils of the [[Temple in Jerusalem]] brought to Rome by [[Titus Flavius|Titus]], and the Empress [[Licinia Eudoxia]] and her daughters [[Eudocia]] and [[Placidia]].  
 
 
 
 
 
*Somewhat unfairly, the term "Vandals" became proverbial for barbaric plunder and destruction oweing to the speed with which their king [[Genseric]]'s army captured Rome in 455C.E.  In truth they didn't damage the city any more than did other invaders, including Christian armies. This notion lives on in the abstract noun [[vandalism]] (since the 1790s only) for senseless destruction
 
 
 
 
 
{{Credit2|Picts|29084937|Vandals|29387679}}
 
  
 
===Positive contributions by barbarians===
 
===Positive contributions by barbarians===
It should be noted, though, that many scholars believe that it was not barbarians or their culture (or lack of culture) that destroyed the Roman Empire. Rather, Roman culture was already in decline. Immorality, social indulgency, and greed destroyed the empire. Barbarians simply hastened the collapse. (For further reading see Edward Gibbon's ''[[The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire]].'') Also, the sacking of Rome by barbarians in 410 c.e. stimulated [[Augustine, St|Augustine]] to write the ''[[City of God]].'' In this work he established God's heavenly city as the true and permanent home to be sought by Christians, compared to the "City of Man," such as Rome, which was clearly vulnerable to attack and without a secure future.
+
It should be noted, though, that many scholars believe that it was not barbarians or their culture (or lack of culture) that destroyed the Roman Empire. Rather, Roman culture was already in decline. Immorality, social indulgency, and greed destroyed the empire. Barbarians simply hastened the collapse (for further reading see Edward Gibbon's ''The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire''). Also, the sacking of Rome by a ragtag group of barbarians in 410 <small>C.E.</small>, less than twenty years after the emperor [[Theodosius]] denounced paganism in favor of Christianity, stimulated [[Augustine, St|Augustine]] to write the ''[[City of God]].'' In this work he established God's heavenly city as the true and permanent home to be sought by Christians, compared to the "City of Man," such as Rome, which was clearly vulnerable to attack and without a secure future.
  
Moreover, there are several aspects of barbarian culture that have contributed to modern culture and civilization. Many modern holidays are based on barbarian traditions and pagan rituals. Santa Claus and the Christmas tree, the Easter bunny and Easter eggs all have their roots in different barbarian festivals. Teutonic, Celtic, and other tribes introduced goldworking techniques, making beautiful jewelry and other ornamentations in styles very different from the classic tradition. Teutonic tribes brought strong iron plows that succeeding in farming the forested lowlands of northern and western Europe. There is also a claim that Celtic and Teutonic tribes developed a 12-based mathematical system (as opposed to the 10-based decimal system), which continues to be the basis of certain units of measurement in the [[United States]] to this day (see Francis Owen, ''The Germanic people: Their origin, expansion, and culture,'' New York: Bookman Associates, 1960). Barbarian stories such as [[Beowulf]], [[Kalevala]], [[Der Ring des Nibelungen]], and the tales of [[King Arthur]] provided great contributions to classic literature. Many famous fairy tales (e.g. tales of the [[Brothers Grimm]]) are also based on barbarian legends and myths.
+
Moreover, there are several aspects of barbarian culture that have contributed to modern culture and civilization. Many modern holidays are based on barbarian traditions and pagan rituals. Santa Claus and the Christmas tree, the Easter bunny and Easter eggs all have their roots in different barbarian festivals. Teutonic, Celtic, and other tribes introduced gold-working techniques, making beautiful jewelry and other ornamentations in styles very different from the classic tradition. Teutonic tribes brought strong iron plows that succeeding in farming the forested lowlands of northern and western Europe. There is also a claim that Celtic and Teutonic tribes developed a 12-based mathematical system (as opposed to the 10-based decimal system), which continues to be the basis of certain units of measurement in the [[United States]] to this day (see Francis Owen, ''The Germanic People: Their Origin, Expansion, and Culture''). Barbarian stories such as [[Beowulf]], [[Kalevala]], [[Der Ring des Nibelungen]], and the tales of [[King Arthur]] provided great contributions to classic literature. Many famous fairy tales (e.g. tales of the [[Brothers Grimm]]) are also based on barbarian legends and myths.
  
 
== Biblical perspective ==
 
== Biblical perspective ==
In the [[New Testament]] the term "barbarian" is used in its Hellenic sense&ndash;to describe non-Greeks or those who merely speak a different language. For example, in Acts 28:2 and Acts 28:4 the author, probably from the Greek-Roman standpoint, refers to the inhabitants of Malta (formerly a Carthaginian colony) as “barbarians.” Similarly, in Colossians 3:11 the word is used for those nations of the [[Roman Empire]] that did not speak Greek. The writer of Romans 1:14 suggests that Greeks together with non-Greeks (i.e. “barbarians”) compose the whole human race. The term here, therefore, merely indicates a separation of Greek-speaking cultures from the non-Greek-speaking ones, the term itself not bearing any deprecatory value. However, elsewhere in the Bible this is not the case. In 1 Corinthians 14:11 [[Saint Paul|Paul]] uses the term in its derogatory sense&ndash;to describe someone who speaks an unintelligible language. "If then I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be to him that spoke a barbarian, and he that spoke will be a barbarian unto me." Paul here denounces the speaking in tongues, comparing it with the barbarian (i.e. foreign) language, which is useless if it cannot be understood, therefore not being able to convey the message from God. [[Philo]] and [[Josephus]], together other Roman writers, used this term to separate Greco-Roman culture from other cultures, implying the supremacy of the former.
+
In the [[New Testament]] the term "barbarian" is used in its Hellenic sense&mdash;to describe non-Greeks or those who merely speak a different language. For example, in Acts 28:2 and Acts 28:4 the author, probably from the Greek-Roman standpoint, refers to the inhabitants of Malta (formerly a Carthaginian colony) as “barbarians.” Similarly, in Colossians 3:11 the word is used for those nations of the Roman Empire that did not speak Greek. The writer of Romans 1:14 suggests that Greeks together with non-Greeks (i.e. “barbarians”) compose the whole human race. The term here, therefore, merely indicates a separation of Greek-speaking cultures from the non-Greek-speaking ones, the term itself not bearing any deprecatory value. However, elsewhere in the Bible this is not the case. In 1 Corinthians 14:11 [[Saint Paul|Paul]] uses the term in its derogatory sense&mdash;to describe someone who speaks an unintelligible language. "If then I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be to him that spoke a barbarian, and he that spoke will be a barbarian unto me." Paul here denounces the speaking in tongues, comparing it with the barbarian (i.e. foreign) language, which is useless if it cannot be understood, therefore not being able to convey the message from God. [[Philo]] and [[Josephus]], together other Roman writers, used this term to separate Greco-Roman culture from other cultures, implying the supremacy of the former.
  
 
== Cross-cultural perspective ==
 
== Cross-cultural perspective ==
 
From the cross-cultural perspective, the term “barbarian” is used in the context of the encounter of two different cultures. Many peoples have regarded alien or rival cultures as "barbarian," because they were unrecognizably strange. Thus, from this perspective the term has a rather pejorative meaning.  
 
From the cross-cultural perspective, the term “barbarian” is used in the context of the encounter of two different cultures. Many peoples have regarded alien or rival cultures as "barbarian," because they were unrecognizably strange. Thus, from this perspective the term has a rather pejorative meaning.  
For example, the Greeks admired [[Scythian]] and [[Eastern Gauls]] as heroic individuals, but considered their culture to be barbaric. Similarly, Romans saw various [[Germanic]], [[Gaul]], and [[Hun]] tribes as essentially barbaric.
+
For example, the Greeks admired Scythian and Eastern Gauls as heroic individuals, but considered their culture to be barbaric. Similarly, Romans saw various Germanic, Gaul, and Hun tribes as essentially barbaric.
 
The Chinese ([[Han Chinese]]) regarded the [[Xiongnu]], [[Tatars]], [[Turks]], [[Mongols]], [[Jurchen]], [[Manchu]], and even [[Europeans]] as barbaric. The Chinese used different terms for barbarians from different directions of the compass. Those in the east were called ''Dongyi'' (东夷), those in the west were called ''Xirong'' (西戎), those in the south were called ''Nanman'' (南蛮), and those in the north were called ''Beidi'' (北狄).  
 
The Chinese ([[Han Chinese]]) regarded the [[Xiongnu]], [[Tatars]], [[Turks]], [[Mongols]], [[Jurchen]], [[Manchu]], and even [[Europeans]] as barbaric. The Chinese used different terms for barbarians from different directions of the compass. Those in the east were called ''Dongyi'' (东夷), those in the west were called ''Xirong'' (西戎), those in the south were called ''Nanman'' (南蛮), and those in the north were called ''Beidi'' (北狄).  
  
This way of describing foreigners was adopted by the Japanese when Europeans first came to Japan. They were called ''nanbanjin'' (南蛮人), literally "Barbarians from the South," because the Portuguese ships appeared to sail from the South. Today, Japanese use ''gaikokujin'' (&#22806;&#22269;&#20154; literally translated as "outside country person") to refer politely to foreigners. The term ''gaijin'' (&#22806;&#20154; literally translated as "outside person") is also used today to refer to foreigners, with somewhat mixed connotations since this term was originally used to refer to someone as an "outsider" or "enemy." However, the term ''gaijin'' does not include any reference to whether the person is a "barbarian," in the sense of being uncivlized.
+
This way of describing foreigners was adopted by the Japanese when Europeans first came to Japan. They were called ''nanbanjin'' (南蛮人), literally "Barbarians from the South," because the Portuguese ships appeared to sail from the South. Today, Japanese use ''gaikokujin'' (&#22806;&#22269;&#20154; literally translated as "outside country person") to refer politely to foreigners. The term ''gaijin'' (&#22806;&#20154; literally translated as "outside person") is also used today to refer to foreigners, with somewhat mixed connotations since this term was originally used to refer to someone as an "outsider" or "enemy." However, the term ''gaijin'' does not include any reference to whether the person is a "barbarian," in the sense of being uncivilized or violent.
  
 
== Sociological perspective ==
 
== Sociological perspective ==
 
From the sociological viewpoint, the concept of “barbarian” is connected with, and depends upon, a carefully defined use of the term [[civilization]]. Civilization denotes a settled (city/urban) way of life that is organized on principles broader than the extended family or tribe. Surpluses of necessities can be stored and redistributed and [[division of labor]] produces some luxury goods (even if only for the elite, priesthood, or kings). The barbarian is not an integrated part of the civilization, but depends on settlements as a source of [[slaves]], surpluses and portable luxuries: booty, loot and plunder.
 
From the sociological viewpoint, the concept of “barbarian” is connected with, and depends upon, a carefully defined use of the term [[civilization]]. Civilization denotes a settled (city/urban) way of life that is organized on principles broader than the extended family or tribe. Surpluses of necessities can be stored and redistributed and [[division of labor]] produces some luxury goods (even if only for the elite, priesthood, or kings). The barbarian is not an integrated part of the civilization, but depends on settlements as a source of [[slaves]], surpluses and portable luxuries: booty, loot and plunder.
  
A distinction, however, needs to be made between the concepts of “[[culture]]” and “civilization.” Rich, deep, authentic human culture exists even without civilization, as the German writers of the early Romantic generation first defined the opposing terms, though they used them as polarities in a way that a modern writer might not. "Culture" should not simply connote "civilization". In this sense, barbarians are those of a different culture, who depend on the civilization dominant in the geographical area where they live.  
+
A distinction, however, needs to be made between the concepts of “[[culture]]” and “civilization.” Rich, deep, authentic human culture exists even without civilization, as the German writers of the early Romantic generation first defined the opposing terms, though they used them as polarities in a way that a modern writer might not. "Culture" should not simply connote "civilization." In this sense, barbarians are those of a different culture, who depend on the civilization dominant in the geographical area where they live.  
  
 
Barbarian culture should not be confused with that of the [[nomad]]. Nomadic societies subsist on what they can [[Hunter-gatherer|hunt and gather]], or on the products of their livestock. They follow food supplies for themselves and/or their animals. The nomad may [[barter]] for necessities, like metalwork, but does not depend on civilization for plunder, as the barbarian does.
 
Barbarian culture should not be confused with that of the [[nomad]]. Nomadic societies subsist on what they can [[Hunter-gatherer|hunt and gather]], or on the products of their livestock. They follow food supplies for themselves and/or their animals. The nomad may [[barter]] for necessities, like metalwork, but does not depend on civilization for plunder, as the barbarian does.
  
 
== Psychological perspective ==
 
== Psychological perspective ==
From the psychological perspective, the term “barbarian” can be associated with a stereotypical image of someone who is not a member of one's own group. As Bouris, Turner, and Gagnon (1997) put it, “Stereotypes function to represent inter-group realities&ndash;creating images of the out-group (and the in-group) that explain, rationalize, and justify the inter-group relationship” (p. 273). Accordingly, group-thinking creates a specific context for inter- and intra-group relationships, which use stereotypes as a means of group interaction. For [[Social psychology|social psychologists]], inter-group relationships (cooperation-competition, in-group status) are closely associated with intra-group relationships. Sentiments and behavior of the in-group members, usually seen in a positive and morally correct light, are created in opposition to members of other groups. Positive and moral self-image is attributed to all members of the in-group, while on the other hand, out-group membership is regarded as less valued. Stereotypes and negative images of the out-group are thus constructed to serve the function of degrading the out-group and keeping the balance between in- and out-group membership.  
+
From the psychological perspective, the term “barbarian” can be associated with a stereotypical image of someone who is not a member of one's own group. As Bouris, Turner, and Gagnon (1997) put it, “Stereotypes function to represent inter-group realities&ndash;creating images of the out-group (and the in-group) that explain, rationalize, and justify the inter-group relationship” (273). Accordingly, group thinking creates a specific context for inter- and intra-group relationships, which use stereotypes as a means of group interaction. For [[Social psychology|social psychologists]], inter-group relationships (cooperation-competition, in-group status) are closely associated with intra-group relationships. Sentiments and behavior of the in-group members, usually seen in a positive and morally correct light, are created in opposition to members of other groups. Positive and moral self-image is attributed to all members of the in-group, while on the other hand, out-group membership is regarded as less valued. Stereotypes and negative images of the out-group are thus constructed to serve the function of degrading the out-group and keeping the balance between in- and out-group membership.  
  
 
The barbarian image serves to demean the members of the other group, creating a morally justified reason for separation from that group. Out-group barbarians are usually depicted as extremely strong but irrational, evil without moral judgment, destructive and violent, whose leaders rely more on emotion than intelligence. This is contrasted with in-group members, who are gentle, moral, and of superior intelligence. Thus, in- and out-group members cannot/should not be mixed together. In this way the intra-group balance is established. (For further reading see Cottam (1986) and Herrmann (1985)).
 
The barbarian image serves to demean the members of the other group, creating a morally justified reason for separation from that group. Out-group barbarians are usually depicted as extremely strong but irrational, evil without moral judgment, destructive and violent, whose leaders rely more on emotion than intelligence. This is contrasted with in-group members, who are gentle, moral, and of superior intelligence. Thus, in- and out-group members cannot/should not be mixed together. In this way the intra-group balance is established. (For further reading see Cottam (1986) and Herrmann (1985)).
 
==Current use==
 
In modern times, fantasy novels and role-playing video games often feature barbarians (such as Conan the Barbarian and Asterix), who are depicted as brave uncivilized warriors, often able to attack with a crazed fury.
 
 
==See also==
 
* [[Michael Wall]]'s 1989 play ''[[Amongst Barbarians]]''
 
* [[Wikipedia:List of words meaning outsider, foreigner or "not one of us"]]
 
  
 
==References==
 
==References==
*Bouris, R. Y., Turner, J. C. & Gagnon, A. (1997). Interdependence, Social Identity, and Discrimination. In R. Spears, P. Oakes, N. Ellemers, & S. A. Haslam (Eds.), ''The Social Psychology of Stereotyping and Group Life'' (pp. 273–295). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
+
* Bouris, R. Y., J. C. Turner & A. Gagnon. 1997”. Interdependence, Social Identity, and Discrimination.In R. Spears, P. Oakes, N. Ellemers, & S. A. Haslam (Eds.), ''The Social Psychology of Stereotyping and Group Life'' (273–295). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
 
+
* Boulding, K. 1959. “National Images and International Systems.''Journal of Conflict Resolution'' 3, 120-131.
*Boulding, K. (1959). National Images and International Systems. ''Journal of Conflict Resolution'', 3, 120-131.
+
* Cottam, M. 1986. ''Foreign Policy Decision Making: The Influence of Cognition.'' Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
 
+
* Gibbon, E. 1983. ''Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'' (R.E. Williams, Ed.). Smithmark Publishers; Abridged & Illus. edition.
*Cottam, M. (1986). ''Foreign Policy Decision Making: The Influence of Cognition.'' Boulder : Westview Press
+
* Hall, Edith. 1989. ''Inventing the Barbarian: Greek Self-Definition through Tragedy''. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0198147805
 
+
* Heider, F. 1958. ''The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations''. New York: Wiley.
*Gibbon, E. (1983). ''Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'', (R.E. Williams, Ed.). Smithmark Publishers; Abrdg&Illu edition  
+
* Herrmann, R. K. 1985. ''Perceptions and Behavior in Soviet Foreign Policy''. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
 
+
* Owen, Francis. 1960. ''The Germanic people: Their Origin, Expansion, and Culture''. New York: Bookman Associates. ISBN 0880295791
*Hall, E. (1989). ''Inventing the Barbarian: Greek Self-Definition through Tragedy''. Oxford/New york
 
 
 
*Heider, F. (1958). ''The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations''. New York: Wiley.
 
 
 
*Herrmann, R. K. (1985). ''Perceptions and Behavior in Soviet Foreign Policy''. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
 
 
 
*Owen, Francis, (1960). ''The Germanic people: Their Origin, Expansion, and Culture,'' New York: Bookman Associates.
 
  
{{Credit|23663836}}
+
{{Credit7|Barbarian|23663836|Berbers|29609342|Goths|29607614|Attila_the_Hun|29675103|Magyars|29427456|Picts|29084937|Vandals|29387679|}}

Latest revision as of 22:32, 10 February 2023



The term Barbarian does not derive from the name of any tribe or cultural group. It is not a name one gives to oneself, rather it is given to others. The Greeks originally used the term to denote any foreigner of a different culture and language background. While it did not initially have a pejorative connotation, it was used by those of relatively advanced civilizations to describe others, who were considered less civilized. Thus, the term came to refer to people from more primitive cultures, whose people usually relied on physical strength more than intellect. Today, "barbarian" is used to describe someone using excessive violence without considering other options.

Although barbarian cultures generally worked against the advancement of civilization, there are historical examples in which barbarian cultures and actions contributed to societal progress. In particular, when a culture has become stagnant and is in decline, pressure from barbarians can stimulate innovation and bring new energy, or can hasten the demise of a society that is seriously corrupt.

Origin of the term

The term "barbarian" is not derived from the name of any tribe or cultural group; there is no country called "barbar." The word comes from the Greek language, and was used to connote any foreigner not sharing a recognized culture or language with the speaker or writer employing the term. The word was probably formed by imitation of the incomprehensible sounds of a foreign language (“bar-bar”). Originally, it was not a derogatory term; it simply meant anything that was not Greek, including language, people or customs. Later, as the Greeks encountered more foreigners, some of whom learned Greek but spoke with a strange accent, the term took on the connotation of primitive and uncivilized. When the Greek civilization and culture was threatened by others (e.g. Persian or Gothic tribes) the connotation of violence was added. The Romans inherited this view from the Greeks, and in their encounters with different tribes across Europe usually called those tribes “barbarian.” However, being war- and conquest-oriented, the Romans admired barbarians as fearless and brave warriors.

Historical perspective

As the Roman Empire spread throughout Europe and Northern Africa they encountered various tribes and peoples. Some fought violently against the invading Roman armies, and continued raiding and looting after Roman conquest of their homelands. The Romans, with their well-organized military, regarded these violent and uncouth enemy tribes as barbarians.

Although critical of their primitive culture, the Romans respected the bravery and fighting ability of barbarians. In the latter stages of the Roman Empire, around the fourth and fifth centuries C.E., the Romans even started to recruit young barbarian males to serve in the Roman army, a practice known as the barbarization of the Roman Empire. Gothic and Vandal soldiers were employed to protect the empire's outer borders. However, this encouraged barbarians to attack the Romans more, due to the perceived weakness that barbarization produced, and, in the long run, aided in the final breakdown of the empire.

The following are examples of some of the tribes referred to as barbarian.

Berbers

The term "barbarian" does not come from the name of these people. Instead, the Berbers, a group of whom were originally known as Numidians, received the name "Berber" from the Roman term barbara or barbarian when they first encountered Romans.

The Berbers have lived in North Africa for as far back as records of the area go. References to them occur frequently in ancient Egyptian, Greek, and Roman sources. The Byzantine chroniclers often complain of the Mazikes (Amazigh) raiding outlying monasteries.

Goths

The Goths were an East Germanic tribe which originated in Scandinavia (specifically Gotland and Götaland). They migrated southwards and conquered parts of the Roman Empire.

Though many of the fighting nomads who followed them were to prove more bloody, the Goths were feared because the captives they took in battle were sacrificed to their god of war, Tyz [1](the one-Handed Tyr), and the captured arms hung in trees as a token-offering.

A force of Goths launched one of the first major "barbarian" invasions of the Roman Empire. (Hermannus Contractus, quoting Eusebius, has "263: Macedonia, Graecia, Pontus, Asia et aliae provinciae depopulantur per Gothos"). A year later, however, they suffered a devastating defeat at the Battle of Naissus and were driven back across the Danube River.

Huns

The Huns, led by Attila (right, foreground), ride into Italy.

The Huns were a nomadic people who invaded Europe and built an enormous empire, defeating the Ostrogoths and Visigoths, and reaching the border of the Roman empire. They were primitive people, inspiring great fear throughout Europe as formidable warriors, skilled at archery and horsemanship, carrying out ferocious and unpredictable charges in battle.

Atli. From an illustration to the Poetic Edda.

Attila the Hun ca. 406–453) was the last and most powerful king of the Huns. He reigned over what was then Europe's largest empire, stretching from Central Europe to the Black Sea and from the Danube River to the Baltic. During his rule he was among the direst enemies of the Eastern and Western Roman Empires: he invaded the Balkans twice and encircled Constantinople in the second invasion. He marched through France as far as Orleans before being turned back at Chalons; and he drove the western emperor Valentinian III from his capital at Ravenna in 452.

Though his empire died with him, and he left no remarkable legacy, Attila has become a legendary figure in the history of Europe. He is known in Western history and tradition as the grim "Scourge of God", and his name has become a byword for cruelty and barbarism. Some of this may arise from a conflation of his traits, in the popular imagination, with those perceived in later warlords such as the Mongol Genghis Khan and Tamerlane: all run together as cruel, clever, and sanguinary lovers of battle and pillage. The reality of his character may be more complex. The historical context of Attila's life played a large part in determining his later public image: in the waning years of the western Empire, his conflicts with Aetius (often called the "last of the Romans") and the strangeness of his culture both helped dress him in the mask of the ferocious barbarian and enemy of civilization, as he has been portrayed in any number of films and other works of art. The Germanic epics in which he appears offer more nuanced depictions: he is both a noble and generous ally, as Etzel in the Nibelungenlied, and a cruel miser, as Atli in the Volsunga Saga and the Poetic Edda.

Magyars

Prince Árpád crossing the Carpathians.

The Magyars are an ethnic group living primarily in Hungary and neighboring areas, and speaking a language of the Finno-Ugric family.

Originally the Magyars were situated to the east of the Ural Mountains in Siberia, where they hunted and fished and developed horse breeding and riding. They migrated southward and westward, and in 896, under the leadership of Árpád the Magyars crossed the Carpathians to enter the Carpathian Basin.

The century between their arrival from the eastern European plains and the consolidation of the Kingdom of Hungary in 1001 was dominated by Magyar pillaging campaigns across Europe, from (Denmark) to the Iberian peninsula. Their merciless looting caused them to be known as the "scourge of Europe."

Picts

The Picts were a group of pre-Celtic tribes that lived in Caledonia, which is now the part of Scotland north of the River Forth. During the Roman occupation of Britain, the Picts continually attacked Hadrian's Wall.

Picti is usually taken to mean painted or tattooed in Latin. Julius Caesar mentions the British Celtic custom of body painting in Book V of his Gallic Wars, stating Omnes vero se Britanni vitro inficiunt, quod caeruleum efficit colorem, atque hoc horridiores sunt in pugna aspectu; which means: "In fact all Britanni stain themselves with vitrum, which produces a dark blue color, and by this means they are more terrifying to face in battle…" Alternatively, the name Pict may be of Celtic origin. Legends about the Picts also include mention of possible Scythian origins—linking them with another remote pre-literate people. It should also be noted that Roman and Medieval scholars tended to ascribe a Scythian origin to any barbarian people (including the Scots and Goths) in order to emphasize their barbarity and ‘otherness.’

Vandals

The Vandals were an East Germanic tribe that entered the late Roman Empire during the fifth century. They traveled through Europe until they met resistance from the Franks, who populated and controlled the Roman possessions in northern Gaul. Although they were victorious, 20,000 Vandals died in the resulting battle. They then crossed the Rhine River, invading Gaul. The Vandals plundered their way westward and southward through Aquitaine, finally crossing the Pyrenees mountain range into the Iberian Peninsula. The Vandals may have given their name to the province of Andalusia, in modern Spain, where they temporarily settled before pushing on to Africa, where they created a state, centered on the city of Carthage.

In 455, the Vandals attacked and took Rome. They plundered the city for two weeks, departing with countless valuables. The term "vandalism" survives as a legacy of this barbaric plunder and senseless destruction.

Positive contributions by barbarians

It should be noted, though, that many scholars believe that it was not barbarians or their culture (or lack of culture) that destroyed the Roman Empire. Rather, Roman culture was already in decline. Immorality, social indulgency, and greed destroyed the empire. Barbarians simply hastened the collapse (for further reading see Edward Gibbon's The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire). Also, the sacking of Rome by a ragtag group of barbarians in 410 C.E., less than twenty years after the emperor Theodosius denounced paganism in favor of Christianity, stimulated Augustine to write the City of God. In this work he established God's heavenly city as the true and permanent home to be sought by Christians, compared to the "City of Man," such as Rome, which was clearly vulnerable to attack and without a secure future.

Moreover, there are several aspects of barbarian culture that have contributed to modern culture and civilization. Many modern holidays are based on barbarian traditions and pagan rituals. Santa Claus and the Christmas tree, the Easter bunny and Easter eggs all have their roots in different barbarian festivals. Teutonic, Celtic, and other tribes introduced gold-working techniques, making beautiful jewelry and other ornamentations in styles very different from the classic tradition. Teutonic tribes brought strong iron plows that succeeding in farming the forested lowlands of northern and western Europe. There is also a claim that Celtic and Teutonic tribes developed a 12-based mathematical system (as opposed to the 10-based decimal system), which continues to be the basis of certain units of measurement in the United States to this day (see Francis Owen, The Germanic People: Their Origin, Expansion, and Culture). Barbarian stories such as Beowulf, Kalevala, Der Ring des Nibelungen, and the tales of King Arthur provided great contributions to classic literature. Many famous fairy tales (e.g. tales of the Brothers Grimm) are also based on barbarian legends and myths.

Biblical perspective

In the New Testament the term "barbarian" is used in its Hellenic sense—to describe non-Greeks or those who merely speak a different language. For example, in Acts 28:2 and Acts 28:4 the author, probably from the Greek-Roman standpoint, refers to the inhabitants of Malta (formerly a Carthaginian colony) as “barbarians.” Similarly, in Colossians 3:11 the word is used for those nations of the Roman Empire that did not speak Greek. The writer of Romans 1:14 suggests that Greeks together with non-Greeks (i.e. “barbarians”) compose the whole human race. The term here, therefore, merely indicates a separation of Greek-speaking cultures from the non-Greek-speaking ones, the term itself not bearing any deprecatory value. However, elsewhere in the Bible this is not the case. In 1 Corinthians 14:11 Paul uses the term in its derogatory sense—to describe someone who speaks an unintelligible language. "If then I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be to him that spoke a barbarian, and he that spoke will be a barbarian unto me." Paul here denounces the speaking in tongues, comparing it with the barbarian (i.e. foreign) language, which is useless if it cannot be understood, therefore not being able to convey the message from God. Philo and Josephus, together other Roman writers, used this term to separate Greco-Roman culture from other cultures, implying the supremacy of the former.

Cross-cultural perspective

From the cross-cultural perspective, the term “barbarian” is used in the context of the encounter of two different cultures. Many peoples have regarded alien or rival cultures as "barbarian," because they were unrecognizably strange. Thus, from this perspective the term has a rather pejorative meaning. For example, the Greeks admired Scythian and Eastern Gauls as heroic individuals, but considered their culture to be barbaric. Similarly, Romans saw various Germanic, Gaul, and Hun tribes as essentially barbaric. The Chinese (Han Chinese) regarded the Xiongnu, Tatars, Turks, Mongols, Jurchen, Manchu, and even Europeans as barbaric. The Chinese used different terms for barbarians from different directions of the compass. Those in the east were called Dongyi (东夷), those in the west were called Xirong (西戎), those in the south were called Nanman (南蛮), and those in the north were called Beidi (北狄).

This way of describing foreigners was adopted by the Japanese when Europeans first came to Japan. They were called nanbanjin (南蛮人), literally "Barbarians from the South," because the Portuguese ships appeared to sail from the South. Today, Japanese use gaikokujin (外国人 literally translated as "outside country person") to refer politely to foreigners. The term gaijin (外人 literally translated as "outside person") is also used today to refer to foreigners, with somewhat mixed connotations since this term was originally used to refer to someone as an "outsider" or "enemy." However, the term gaijin does not include any reference to whether the person is a "barbarian," in the sense of being uncivilized or violent.

Sociological perspective

From the sociological viewpoint, the concept of “barbarian” is connected with, and depends upon, a carefully defined use of the term civilization. Civilization denotes a settled (city/urban) way of life that is organized on principles broader than the extended family or tribe. Surpluses of necessities can be stored and redistributed and division of labor produces some luxury goods (even if only for the elite, priesthood, or kings). The barbarian is not an integrated part of the civilization, but depends on settlements as a source of slaves, surpluses and portable luxuries: booty, loot and plunder.

A distinction, however, needs to be made between the concepts of “culture” and “civilization.” Rich, deep, authentic human culture exists even without civilization, as the German writers of the early Romantic generation first defined the opposing terms, though they used them as polarities in a way that a modern writer might not. "Culture" should not simply connote "civilization." In this sense, barbarians are those of a different culture, who depend on the civilization dominant in the geographical area where they live.

Barbarian culture should not be confused with that of the nomad. Nomadic societies subsist on what they can hunt and gather, or on the products of their livestock. They follow food supplies for themselves and/or their animals. The nomad may barter for necessities, like metalwork, but does not depend on civilization for plunder, as the barbarian does.

Psychological perspective

From the psychological perspective, the term “barbarian” can be associated with a stereotypical image of someone who is not a member of one's own group. As Bouris, Turner, and Gagnon (1997) put it, “Stereotypes function to represent inter-group realities–creating images of the out-group (and the in-group) that explain, rationalize, and justify the inter-group relationship” (273). Accordingly, group thinking creates a specific context for inter- and intra-group relationships, which use stereotypes as a means of group interaction. For social psychologists, inter-group relationships (cooperation-competition, in-group status) are closely associated with intra-group relationships. Sentiments and behavior of the in-group members, usually seen in a positive and morally correct light, are created in opposition to members of other groups. Positive and moral self-image is attributed to all members of the in-group, while on the other hand, out-group membership is regarded as less valued. Stereotypes and negative images of the out-group are thus constructed to serve the function of degrading the out-group and keeping the balance between in- and out-group membership.

The barbarian image serves to demean the members of the other group, creating a morally justified reason for separation from that group. Out-group barbarians are usually depicted as extremely strong but irrational, evil without moral judgment, destructive and violent, whose leaders rely more on emotion than intelligence. This is contrasted with in-group members, who are gentle, moral, and of superior intelligence. Thus, in- and out-group members cannot/should not be mixed together. In this way the intra-group balance is established. (For further reading see Cottam (1986) and Herrmann (1985)).

References
ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

  • Bouris, R. Y., J. C. Turner & A. Gagnon. 1997”. Interdependence, Social Identity, and Discrimination.” In R. Spears, P. Oakes, N. Ellemers, & S. A. Haslam (Eds.), The Social Psychology of Stereotyping and Group Life (273–295). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
  • Boulding, K. 1959. “National Images and International Systems.” Journal of Conflict Resolution 3, 120-131.
  • Cottam, M. 1986. Foreign Policy Decision Making: The Influence of Cognition. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
  • Gibbon, E. 1983. Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (R.E. Williams, Ed.). Smithmark Publishers; Abridged & Illus. edition.
  • Hall, Edith. 1989. Inventing the Barbarian: Greek Self-Definition through Tragedy. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 0198147805
  • Heider, F. 1958. The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley.
  • Herrmann, R. K. 1985. Perceptions and Behavior in Soviet Foreign Policy. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.
  • Owen, Francis. 1960. The Germanic people: Their Origin, Expansion, and Culture. New York: Bookman Associates. ISBN 0880295791

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.