Let's start at the beginning. In 722 BCE, the Northern Kingdom of Israel fell to the Assyrians and the majority of its population was apparently expelled. These are the "Ten Lost Tribes". This sort of forced migration seems to be part of standard part of Assyrian management of newly conquered territories. In about 586 BCE, the Southern Kingdom of Judah (remember, that Israel had been divided into two distinct kingdoms) was conquered by Babylon, and only the notables led off (the "Babylonian exile"). In neither of these cases do the Hebrew/Jews seems to be particularly singled out.

Lets skip to the Roman Era. Here, the Jews are unique. Roman policy granted wide religious freedom--however, there were two exceptions. 1) secret "mystery cults" were widely suspected, 2) groups that refused to sacrifice to the emperor (first Jews, later also Christians) were treated as suspect. The Jews led a series of wars against the Empire called the "Jewish Wars" that ended up with the destruction of the Temple after the First Jewish–Roman War (67-70 CE) and ultimately the majority of the Jewish population of Roman Province of Judea being killed, exiled, or sold into slavery in the aftermath of the Bar Kokhba Revolt (132 – 136 CE). These are exemplary of the unique relationship Jews have within the Roman Empire, but is likely not what you're asking about.

Most of what people think of are the Medieval and Early Modern expulsions from states in Christian Europe. One thing to note is that Jews existed in these places at all. No other religion besides Christianity existed in these states at all. Judaism had a special status that, say, Roman Paganism did not, and therefore they (often) were the only religious minority allowed to exist. So, it's important to note, they were the only religious minority that could be expelled from Europe (besides various Christian "heretics"). It's worth noting that the vast majority of expulsions of Jews were done by Christians, with a few isolated (and generally late) cases of expulsion by Muslim rulers.

Karen Barkey and Ira Katznelson have an interesting article, whose name I forgot, that argues that the expulsion of the Jews by England in 1290 and France around the same time were the result of "state formation"/"state making". Remember, for most of post-Roman history the centralized state as we imagine didn't exist. It was an overlapping series of domains where rulers claimed varying levels of sovereignty. Katznelson and Barkey argue that the Jews were expelled in England as a compromise between the royalty and the nobility in the process of state formation (primarily, the nobility owned Jewish bankers a tremendous amount of money, as Jews often formed the only source of credit). In France, they argue that they were expelled for a different reason (I believe because the King owed them money, but I can't be sure). But in both cases, though the exact reasons were different, the expulsion of the Jews was part of the same process of state formation, a result of negotiations around the clashing interests of royalty and nobility. This pattern, they argue, is repeated in other states (Western and Northern Europe is generally seen at the vanguard of modern state formation in Europe--see Charles Tilly's epic Coercion, Capital, and European States, AD 990-1992).

It's also worth mentioning that Jews were often the only available scapegoats. Many of the expulsions took place during plagues, especially in Germany, where Jews were often accused of poisoning wells. They were also often occurred after an accusation of blood libel. Historically, it's worth noting that blood libel accusation (which date back to at least the 12th century in Christian Europe) never occurred in the Islamic World until the 19th century, and even there, not coincidentally, the first several cases accusation were brought by Christians living under Ottoman Rule at the same there was expanding European influence in the Ottoman. But in general, the relationship with minority communities was different in the Ottoman World (much is made of "dhimmi" status, but there's a reason for that--especially in the Ottoman Empire, the "millet system" in both formal and informal forms was an important strategy for rule). In the Muslim World, Jews and Christians were often included alongside Muslims as (unequal) subjects in a way that they were not in Europe. Granted, even these limited rights were frequently violated, but this legal framework of (unequal) belonging provided the Jews (and minority Christians) with much more stability than they had in most of Europe of the same period. This situation remains essentially until nationalism arrives in the 19th century century.

Nationalism, the idea that the legitimacy of the state comes from its relationship with a titular "nation" (France is for the French, Germany for the Germans), generally dates only back to the French Revolution (this is the traditional starting date). There were of course other forms identity underlying the legitimacy of states before this--especially religion, as John Armstrong argues in Nations Before Nationalism, but this wasn't really nationalism in the sense that we see (a political demand for a Christian state for all the Christian, etc.). A few scholars--Philip Gorski, Liah Greenfeld, Anthony Marx--have argued, convincingly I think, that we should see nationalism as an Early Modern phenomenon, rather than entirely a Modern one (remembering that "the Modern Era" for political history is conventionally dated to around the French Revolution). Among these, Marx argues most convincingly that nationalism comes not just from union--gathering all the Rutherians into the Rutherian state--but from exclusion. He engages with three main examples (England, Spain, and France). In Spain, we see this process of expulsion--this Proto-Spanish nationalism--in the form of the expulsion of Muslims and Jews from Spain in 1492 (and from Portugal in 1496). This sets the ground for the later Spanish nation state. Similarly, in France we see expulsions, but not of Jews. Rather, we see France kill and expel Protestants to create a purely Catholic realm (cf. St. Bartholomew's Day massacre in 1572). These sorts of expulsions were common during the European "Wars of Religion". So nationalism, and the drive to create in theory culturally homogenous states, wasn't merely a process that affected the Jews, though it was a process that often affected the Jews. It's also worth noting that "Jewish emancipation"--Jew being able function as equal citizens--doesn't emerge until the French Revolution, and the question of whether Jews can really be members of the nation-state isn't settled until the 19th and 20th centuries (cf. the Dreyfus Affair in France, or the Nazi stripping of the rights of German Jews). Many of the expulsions of Jews (and Catholics and Protestants, etc.) that occur during the early Modern Period, Anthony Marx argues, should be seen as examples of emerging nationalism where cultural identity becomes tied to the polity (compare this to earlier empires which were inherently diverse).

So, therefore, recent social science works argues that 1) since Jews were the most common religious minority in Christian Europe, they were the ones most commonly persecuted against, 2) that a lot of the Medieval struggles around nationalism have to do with negotiations of elites around the beginnings of modern state formation/centralization, 3) I forgot to mention also the traditional answer of the late Medieval religious revival, including the Crusades, that ultimately led to the Reformation and the Counter-Reformation, which mattered in some places (especially when tied to Blood Libel), just not the French and English cases I mentioned, 4) eventually the goal of religious homogeneity presaged the overall goal of cultural homogeneity of nationalism. Again, this is all primarily in Europe until the 19th century, though there were large populations of Jews in Anatolia, North Africa, Mesopotamia, Arabia, and Persia who were mostly unmolested. This, I think, is evidence that the repeated expulsion of the Jews is not necessarily something inherent in the Jews, but something (or several things) that characterized the relationship between Jewish minorities and Christian rulers during this period.

Edit: One final note. In the video, they often repeat the names of territories in a relatively short period. The reason for this is Jews were expelled, here for either reasons related to Christian religious revival or debts due to state formation, and then were at times often quickly let back in for economic reasons (i.e. the state needed lines of credit that only the Jews could provide in this period), and then quickly expelled either for economic reasons again (rulers had quickly racked up debt) or because of a deal with religious revivalists. But the reasons they were let back in hints at one of the reasons they were expelled.

As a piggyback question can I ask if Jews have faced persecution in India? I visited an old synagogue in Cochin, India a couple of years back and they had a bunch of paintings illustrating how Jews have been visiting and settling in that part of India since around 200 BC.

One component of "Jewishness" is that it isn't just a religion, or genetic heritage, it is both of those but there is also a an incredibly strong cultural and community aspect that also identifies heavily with keeping the community and culture together while in a foreign land, and this goes way back to the very foundations of Judiasm ~3,000 years ago.

What we know as Judaism today developed over many centuries, beginning with a henotheistic tradition where people had a patron deity among a pantheon of deities and shrines and idols could be found in homes and hillsides around the countryside, and evolving to a strict monotheistic sect that insisted there was only a single god and he was to be worshiped in a single location (the Temple in Jerusalem).

Then the land of Israel was overtaken by Assyrian and the Babylonians, and many Israelites were taken into captivity by the Babylonians. They took what holy writings they could with them as they went into enslavement.

Now this is where things get interesting, and more relevant to your question. What we see historically in these kinds of situations is that the people who were overcome accept that their deity failed and so come to accept the victorious culture's deity as their new object of worship, and they begin to meld into the culture they are in. Not so with the enslaved Israelites.

The Israelites were able to adapt their beliefs so that instead of their god losing against a more powerful god, they took the perspective that their god was punishing them for disobedience, using other cultures to do so. Also, instead of requiring a single location for the worship of their god, they were able to change it to worshiping through personal and group observances.

It is during this Exhilic Period that the last changes were made to the Hebrew Bible (which up until that point had been a more fluid collection of documents over centuries). Eventually the Israelites were released from Babylonian captivity and returned to Judea. Judaism and the Old Testament as we know it today by and large cemented in place. Later conflicts dispersed the Jews out of Israel, and the major Jewish Dispora began and the Jewish people dispersed around Europe.

Going back to your question with that understanding, we see the Jewish people exiled that maintaining their cultural identity while in a foreign (and even hostile) culture is deeply ingrained in the very roots of the religion and cultural identity.

So if you put this group in another land, they aren't going to assimilate the new culture, but instead maintain their own community within the larger community. This sets them up to be an easy target as an "other" when tensions rise and the us-vs-them mentality starts to set in to the general population.

You also get the influence by the Catholic church, who for centuries blamed the Jewish people for the death of Christ, further tarnishing the Jews in the eyes of Europeans with their predominant Christian religion.

Can someone tell me more about the expulsion of Jews in the American South mentioned in the video? Did it happen? What was the aftermath?

Can someone please present this information in map format? I have a hard time visualising everything at once, and I love to think cartographically.

May I generalize the question a bit ? were jews really more persecuted than other groups or is it an easy legend ?

I recently learned that France was quite brutal toward Italian immigration in early 20th, even though now the easy hate has shifted toward arabs, "nobody" remember anti-italian racism, nowadays they're pretty much accepted and "loved". Hence my question about jews.

ps: not starting a contest / misery scale. Just broadening the sample set.