>X conquered Y so all the original inhabitans disappeared/every

I don't see how that is inaccurate. Not every civilization was as kind as colonialists, who gave the natives reserves to live in.

>>3249432
You don't conquer just to govern over a wasteland. You need subjects to work the land.

>>3249401
Sometimes it happens.

http://www.nature.com/news/ancient-genome-study-finds-bronze-age-beaker-culture-invaded-britain-1.21996

>>3249432
Because it almost never happened.
Furthermore mixing with new population doesn't mean you stop being descendant of old population. Do you understand how humans procreate?
But that is irrelevant, mass slaughters of that scale were very rare in history, and what usually happened was former or new elites ruling in the name of conqueror. Cultures disappeared, but genetics don't really disappear, unless you wipe out entire population.

>>3249445
you replace the natives with your own stock for that.

>>3249449
Yes, it happened.
But it didn't happen in most commonly cited cases: Muslim invasions of Iberia and Italy, Ottoman rule in Balkans, Arab/Turkic rule in Persia, Arab rule everywhere outside of Arabia for that matter.
What happened more often was a spread of culture. But even then cultures aren't easy to kill off.

>>3249453
Yeah you just slaugther huge number of people and you move equally huge number of people somewhere. This was very easy to accomplish in pre-modern period. Are you retarded? What are people like you doing on a board like this?

File: 1443657711074.jpg (844KB, 1800x1703px) Image search: [Google]

844KB, 1800x1703px

>>3249465
it happened in britain you twit

>>3249480
No it didn't, Britons are mostly native.

File: Germanic_Europe.gif (75KB, 800x545px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 800x545px

>>3249481

>>3249481

Bell Beakers killed >90% of the preceding population.