It seems that the ancient world did not have a concept of immigration and visa restrictions, in the sense that officials of the country were instructed or empowered to deny certain people the right to enter, live, work, or study in the country. E.g. Roman garrisons didn’t issue 30 day visas to barbarians. What was the first country/nation/city state/duchy/principality/fiefdom/etc. to do this?
When I was at school a group of Australian Aborigines came to tell us about their culture. One of the things they said was that if someone was going to visit another tribe they had to carry a special staff. This let the other tribe know the person was coming peacefully and that he wasn’t a criminal trying to escape his tribe. I guess this isn’t exactly a visa, more like a passport.
In the modern sense, travel visas weren’t common until the first world war. I don’t know which country was first, but I think you could safely say the visa system as we know it originated in Europe around WWI.
Does Japans seclusion period count? From 1633-1853 foreigners were only allowed in one enclave and Japanese people were forbidden to leave.
There’s probably earlier examples of closed Kingdoms if that counts.
I think it does. Is there anything earlier?
I thought Egypt, arguably one of the world’s fist superpowers/nations, restricted folks during certain periods. I could be wrong. This is based on a history class I took 10 years ago.
//not much help here.
Interesting. Anyone have a cite?
It would seem that unless you have a very homogenous culture, determining if someone is a foreigner is going to be a bit difficult for your average ancient person. E.g. if I’m just an ordinary soldier/cop in small town Abydos, Egypt, how do I know that there aren’t people who speak a different language and wear different clothing living lawfully in Alexandria or Cairo as either lawful immigrants or full citizens?
Consider this from Judges 12, circa 11 to 13 century BC (although it doesn’t address your question about lawfully resident foreigners):
Interesting subject. I looked a little for the answer but couldn’t find it. In doing so I did see the statement (Wikipedia) that every country now has restrictions of some sort.
Was there not a system of royalty or their court creating letters for safe passage for their subjects on business abroad in Europe in medieval times? These letters would explain your purpose in traveling and ask that you be treated well, with the implicit threat that if you were not whatever royal issued it would be pissed.
This seems like a primitive passport, sovereign kingdoms didn’t have to let you enter or pass through after all. In fact check your passport as it most likely still has language to this effect, mine does.
Here:
There is also a good history of not only the USA’s history of passports going back to the revolutionary war, but also Europe on the page. Interestingly it was not the UN that managed to make passports a worldwide standard, but the Civil Aviation Organization as late as 1980.
I adore reading journals of early European travelers in Africa, and I think they provide some insight into how travel would work in relatively sparsely populated areas with fragmented political power.
Basically, strangers travelling on their own would be automatically suspicious, and probably wouldn’t last too long. So what you want to do is travel with a group that has well established rights to travel and connections with local authorities in the place where you are going. Explorers often tagged along with traders, slave raiders, military ventures and other accepted and expected groups. Whoever you are travelling with would vouch for your legitimacy to the next authority, who would then vouch for you to the next group of travelers you work with, and so on. Basically, you could leap-frog your way across a long distance by daisy chaining trust networks. Along the way, you could hopefully pick up letters of introduction and letters of safe passage (or even better, official protection) from relatively widely-known authorities to support your case.
Remember that human population was exponentially smaller back in the day, and most people stayed put or followed pretty fixed routes. For most people, a stranger in the area might be something that only happens a few times a year, and it’s going to be big news. Once you show up in a region, people are going to know about you, expect your arrival, and want to hear your story. There wouldn’t be a chance to blend in with the crowd except in really exceptional circumstances, like how Richard Burton was able to blend in to the transient and cosmopolitan atmosphere in Mecca.
Didn’t the Chinese empire in its latter years ban foreigners from entering its countries except certain regions like Hong Kong, Macau etc. ?
Not exactly a “system”, and they were not a formalized model (even those created in a given kingdom and period), but there were such letters asking for safe passage and for assistance in other ways. Originally, in Spanish, letras de paso (passage letters) asked for the bearer to be given safe passage while letras de porte (merchandise letters) or pasaportes (merchandise passages) were given to merchants.
I’ve heard of a case (considered the first fellowship given by the Kingdom of Navarre) where a boy was sent to Cordoba to study with the doctors there; his sponsors asked the king, during a session of Parliament, to give the boy a letter of passage. The boy impressed Parliament so much that he received letters of passage, a letter from the king to his ambassador requesting him to find a teacher who’d accept the boy and to arrange for housing, clothing and board (in the ambassador’s own house or at the teacher’s, whichever the teacher preferred), and a series of letters of charge which would have been the equivalent of modern cheques - they allowed the ambassador to draw funds for the boy’s studies and caretaking; this on top of the letters his former teachers gave him, explaining what he’d studied so far. This case was completely different from a courier bringing documents to an ambassador, or a merchant receiving a certificate of having paid a kingdom’s tax on his merchandise so he wouldn’t be double charged; nowadays they would get different visa stamps on otherwise-identical passports, back then they got different letters.
In fact, it was a big deal during the Roman Republic to be a Roman citizen, and a Pisan, for instance, could not simply move to Rome and participate in the social order there. It was an important event when, as the Republic faltered, Roman generals offered Roman citizenship to some of the Italian socii, allied states that were dominated by Rome.
Yes you could, what you could not do was be a politician, and you were subject to your people’s own laws except when you were doing business with a citizen, in which case Roman law applied. If two people with different legal systems, neither of them a citizen, were doing business with each other, one of the things that they would agree upon if they had any brains was which legal system/tribunals would apply in case of disagreement, something which is still a part of modern contracts.