I say this with all the love and understanding I have, but you guys are all idiots. If you wouldn't ascribe historical accuracy to The Silverlinings Playbook, High Noon, Gladiator or Gone With the Wind why the hell would you base any of your assumptions upon what is depicted in any other cinema? Akira Kurosawa, whose vision is almost singularly responsible for the Samurai film aesthetic, was largely inspired and entranced by American westerns and considered himself honored when his depiction of the 47 Ronin was re-imagined for western viewers as the Magnificent Seven. That sort of nepotism and inbreeding is rampant in film, movies are never influenced so greatly as they are by other movies.
Historically speaking, whether you are talking about Huns, Vikings, Visigoths, Mongols or Bedouins, there have always been cultures which thrived upon predation and exploiting the assumptions of security amongst their more industrious neighbors. This is also true even if you are speaking of mercenaries, displaced soldiers, brigands, revolutionaries or any other artificially created threats bent on economic opportunism which naturally follow the cessation of long standing hostilities in martial or feudally centered societies whether one is talking of the Punic Wars, the Crusades or the American Civil War. The former is usually met with the ire of whatever power is interested in the sovereignty of its domain and the latter usually handled locally by those the most threatened by it, however, there have been ample cases of exceptions to both of those general observations over time.
Economically speaking, progress requires stability and peace. In cultures where there is no rule of law by which to establish a reasonable expectation of personal and profit protection, such as in the Middle East where for centuries neither property nor enterprise were recognized and were subject to arbitrary seizure from magisterial authority without justification or due process, technological and social advancement came slow even in spite of being in an advantageous geographical location situated between two rapidly and differentially progressing hemispheres and gave rise to traditionalism and nomadic inclination. This is also why the European Dark Ages after the Fall of Rome saw significantly fewer, although that is in in no way to suggest lesser, innovations than the period of unparalleled stability preceding it.
Fear gives way to anger even as oppression invariably leads to revolt. The Chinese have been historically unique in being resistant to such cycles, having chosen to simply outlast any would be conquerors and show stoic indifference to what would otherwise be perceived as existential threats, but even they have employed means such as burgeoning bureaucracy and passive intransigence to undermine contested rulership. Their history is one I find fascinating in being utterly alien to everywhere else on earth and in recorded history. Alexis de Tocqueville observed in his American travels that Ohio and Kentucky showed great disparity in wealth and infrastructure, though there was no difference in the land, seasons, or cultural values and composition of its people. After intent observation and reflection he came to sobering conclusion that the only element of significance which separated the two states were their economic foundations, one relied upon slavery the other free association and this been shown to be historically true. China has been an exception to this simply because they refused to be see themselves as slaves regardless of the tyranny and injustice inflicted upon them, though even their progress was staggered by constant aggression and a lack of internal consistency.
In closing, you guys aren't looking for realism. There are ample annals of reality recorded for your contemplation and perusal if that were your inclination. What you searching for is an fantasy reinforcement of your ideological aesthetics. There are common assumption rampant in most of these arguments embracing things like central authority, which is a relative latecomer if not in concept at least in implementation, unquestioningly embracing caste and aristocratic elements without understanding their role and necessity (the Romans had a saying, a Caesar can be made somewhere other than Rome and one need look no further than the example of Septimius Serverus for an example of that that means), the regulation of arms and a lack of individual autonomy, accomplishment and responsibility. People were capable of their own survival before governments, and when governments fail people find a way to carry on. You do humanity a disservice to treat the common folk of your campaigns as hapless and perpetual victims.
