>> how do you mean this "dynamic demographics"?
> What I mean is what you get if large tracts of excellent farmland are
> periodically left alone because of outside disturbances (Indo-
> Europeans, Huns, Avars, Slavs, Hungarians, Ottomans etc.), as has
> happened so often on the Balkans. When quiet conditions return,
> people eager for land descend from the mountains and take up farming,
> with spectacular results for their numbers. Then, if new disturbances
> occur and conditions become unbearable again, people vanish, and of
> those few that survive, most do so by taking up mountain pastoralism.
I wanted to be sure this is what you mean. Now let us see the what we know
versus what we suppouse.
We do know about how people reacted against the Hungarians (late period,
after XIII century), against Turks and Tartars.
We do know from some chronic how people acted agaisnt the Avars. We do not
know how people acted in the time of IE-people, Huns and Slavs. From all we
know, the refugium in the forests and mountains was allways of a short
period, mostly just then when the people have been surprised by such attacks
and they have not been organised to fight against invaders. Or of course,
when they lost the fight and they cuold just flee for surviving. After the
agresors got the controle over one region, they managed to get the locals
accomodated so they can work and pay their tribute for agresors. In so far,
there is from the known facts, nothing which will sustain refuggium in
mountains for longer period of times. It was not in the interest of invaders
either, less the situation they wanted to remain there in the new conquested
space. At least from the time of Avars until Ottomans. What makes us to
supposed people accted in another manner in the times of Huns, Goths,
Romans, Scythians, Cimerians, IE-people?