Lands of the Numics (other than the Comanche who had their own realm far to the east)
Three theories of Numic origins: 1) the expanded east out of the southern San Joaquin Valley 2) they were indigenous to the Great Basin 3) they swept out of the Nevada desert & conquered or destroyed their neighbors in the last 1500 years.
Most Numic tribes do not have myths sharing elements with those of the Amerindians of California - the three Numic tribes that do live in California
Southern Paiute (Numic tribe) myths record a hunter-gatherer warrior from Pacific coast in California slaughtering Anasazi & Fremont Culture agriculturalists & burning their crops in southern NV, southern UT, and northern AZ.
Numics in the Owens Valley and elsewhere do not have myths referencing volcanism, even though eastern California has had volcanism in the last 1500 years.
Northern Paiute defeated the Sai-i, a Hokan tribe, in their conquest of NW Nevada & NE California around the Pit River. Bows are referenced in the myth, so this took place after 500 AD.
Yokuts or another primitive digger tribe warred with the Paiute over rule of the Owens Valley (fertile land until the 1920s)
Author concludes that Numic urheimat was in SW Great Basin in eastern California and western Nevada and traces the migrations by the respective folklore
Thread with excerpts from "Lies of the Tutsi in Eastern Congo/Zaire. A Case Study: South Kivu (Pre-Colonial to 2018)" by John Kapapi
At the time of the 1884 Berlin Conference, what is now the eastern Congo was ruled by eight kingdoms. Rwanda had yet to be united. Per the author, Rwandan (Tutsi & Hutu) migration west of Lake Kivu was minimal at the time.
Belgians created two chiefdoms in North Kivu. One was given to Tutsi from Hunde in 1922, & other was bought from the Hunde in 1939. Conflict with Hunde led to Tutsi preferring to flee to South Kivu during the dynastic struggles following overthrow of King Rwabugiri in 1895.
In line with archaeology, western & central Iberia were populated by hunter-gatherers distinctive from those on Mediterranean coast by their higher Magdalenian ancestry. Those hunter-gatherers had a resurgence over the EEFs as elsewhere during neolithic.
Steppe ancestry in IEs was diluted by the time that they reached SW Iberia at end of third millennium, in line with other studies. However, there are signs of an Eastern Mediterranean migration to Iberia in Bronze Age or earlier:
There was substantial migration to urban areas in Portugal during the Roman period from Eastern Mediterranean and North Africa. If these samples are representative, about half of the urban population was foreign-derived. Date of the site isn't provided, but was after 100 BC.
Caesar's destructiveness around the Rhine can be seen in the palynological record around Cologne. The area was densely cultivated starting about 250 BC and reforested after 50 BC, implying depopulation for a century.
pre-modern mass migrations often had appalling death tolls. Pressure of the German Suebi on the Celt Helvetii must have been tremendous:
Tiberius withdrew Roman troops from east of the Rhine, but left a 10 km no man's land that wasn't resettled by Germans until the late first or early second centuries.
Safavids were, like Ottomans, born in obscurity in chaos of mid-13th century Mongol invasions - although as Sufi order rather than as tribal migration. Contrary to later propaganda, Sheikh Safi was not a sayyid or from a Shia background, but he became prominent in a Shia milieu.
Safavid Order had a waqf (charitable endowment) for its benefit by 1305 in Ardabil. Its network of followers expanded in Anatolia, Khorasan, & Mazandaran under aegis of Ilkhanate & some of its successors, but was forced to arm some of its supporters in at least Ardabil.
Timur, the greatest mystic of his era, liked the Safavid Order & granted it additional lands to financially sustain its missionary efforts. However, the Order was squeezed by his sons, who desires to centralize power in the realm.
Thread with excerpts from "1971: A Global History of the Creation of Bangladesh" by Srinath Raghavan
Eisenhower backed Pakistan, but Kennedy backed India, so by 1965 the USA gave up hope on mediating between the two. That allowed for the Soviets to emerge as the natural mediator in 1965, despite their partiality to India as a result of Pakistan's previous alignment with USA.
Author's sources. While he was able to draw on Indian and foreign archives for thoughts of political leaders, Pakistan's archives are closed. The archives in Bangladesh were destroyed by the Pakistanis prior to their surrender to India in 1971.