Israels Actions

Jews were persecuted originaly for religious reasons. First time racial reasons i know off are mentioned in crazed mumblings of chief inqusitor Torquemada when he persecuted Conversos (converted Jews) in Spain after reconquista. Racial argument was more or less forgotten up to the Hitler & co.

Gypsies were persecuted more or less becouse they were not part of permanent population (more or less migrant problem) and as such problem for rulers as they did not recognised them as their own.

Europe was realy intolerant place comparing to Ottoman empire.

Acctualy not realy. Before the wars between Scots and English under Edy longshanks, England was poor country comparing to Scotland (when niece of Scottish king merried he paid her considerable dowry from his own pocket, but when Edies son got married he had to borrow money to pay for marriage). Irish at the time had enough own problems (they were still fighting Vikings and eachother). Welsh state did not interfere with England (and their constant civil wars like king Stephen vs. empress Maude) as they were separate kingdom quite happy to have nothing to do with pesky Brits .

I don't think so. Some time ago i was reading book dealing with Vandals. There were quite a few maps showing national/tribal population distribution in Europe at the time of Roman empire ( since Ceasar to the destruction of Vandal state by Belisar (Justian's general)). Basques are shown on all maps where there are still living now. They were mountain poeple living in the arse of Europe, had nothing anybody wanted (including Romans) and bothered nobody (or they would be destroyed long time ago - like Avari). Problems started more or less with Spanish crown imposing it's rule over them. More or less only time they wholehartedly supported Spanish goverment was during GCE (Guerra Civil Espaniola - Spanish civil war) when they supported Republic as they were promised authonomy under Repulican rule.

BTW when dealing with Spain i forgot to mention Catalonians. They were rebelling against the crown (C. Columbus - Colon before he turned mercenary he was a a Catalonian pirate in fleet of his uncle fighting his future boss King of Spain). And use of their language and national flag was banned under Franco. Only outlet alowed to them was FC Barcelona kicking arse of FC Real Madrid (guess why they are still crazy about football ). There is still talk about independance from Spain.

 

Vikings in 13th century? Are you sure about that? By that time Skandinavians were contained in Skandinavia. In Russia they were absorved by the Slavs and became the Rus in Kiev,in the British Isles were absorved by the local populations,in France became Normans.

 

Rechecked. You are right to correct me on Ireland. I stand corrected.
[joke]
What do you mean no Vikings at that time?
OK. King of Scotland (contemporary of Eddy longshanks) was more of Norvegian blood than Celt or Pict (and his doughter was married to Norvegian king at the age of 6 after his death to prevent Eddy to grab power in Scotland). Last Viking invasion of England was repulsed by king Harold (Harald) few days before battle of Hastings before another Viking invasion force (Normans) kicked his ass at Hastings (that would be 11 century if i'm not mistaken). Saxons were for all intents and purposes Vikings from baltic coast (i.e. mercenaries an later invasion force seetling in britain pushing out original romanised Britons), same as Normans who were Vikings settling in Normandy so Willy the conqorer was in effect a Viking as was king Harald.
So battle of Hastings is one Viking tribe kicking another Viking tribe in the arse on british soil. So in effect Brits (with exception of celtic Welsh & Irish,and Scots who are Vikingised Celts) nowdays are Vikings.
[/joke]

Both Saxons and Normans were not absorbed into local population but rather pushed out original population (Britons/Celts toward Wales/Cymru, romanised/germanised Gouls/Celts towards Bretagne).

 

[/quote]

For all I know, the normans were actually quite rapidly absorbed into the local population of Normany.
They were a small minority, and most viking men took local wives.
From what I have heard, the nordic language already had motsly faded away after 2-3 generations.
William of Normany for example only spoke french.

 

Ah, yes really. Reading sources as far back as the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle shows that Scots & Welsh raids & invasions of England were commonplace - and they remained so (albiet petering out after the 15th Century) up until Culloden (in the case of the Scots - the Welsh were ground into submission much earlier). Most common were local raids, usually with the simple object of plunder, generally cattle, but serious large-scale invasions lead by kings where not infrequent.

As for Ireland, while she was invaded by England rather than the other way around, it had much to do with the fact that the Irish kings were supporting the Welsh - generally with naval support, an area which the Norman kings and their successors were woefully inadequate.

Re: the Basques - I admit I was guessing there

Ok, historical can of worms #1.
Did the Saxons kill/relocate all Celts? If so, how? And where did they find the people to re-populate the land they took? Or did they simply move in as the new overlords/ruling class, much like the Normans did to them, with the two races becoming intermingled?

The Normans also intermixed with the Saxon population. Forget the Victorian historian version of evil Norman overlords and good & true Saxon peasants - less than 100 years after the conquest there can be found no legal trace of the concepts of 'Norman' and 'Saxon' - immediately prior to the conquest they were distinct & seperate.

 

Not too much of a joke...
Except the 'English' at the time were a mixture of Celt, 'Anglo-Saxon' and Viking (both Danish and Norwegian), and the Normans were essentially French with a dash of Viking

 

Got you talking/writing at last
I should start about early history of Slovenes and theories about our settlement here, but i doubt i would get as much response from you guys. I'm in noughty mood today

HE, HE HE Suma sumarum British are Vikings with dash of Celtic and French (Romanised - Germanised - Romanised Celts) = Vikings with dash of Celtic

Off course. Saxsons were in Britain and Normans were in Normandy with English channel between them.

 

You mean ; Vikings exterminated ALL the populations with saxon origins who had already exterminated Romano-British populations -- Some Celts survived in Scotland and Wales however-- and then they were mixed up with a few Franco-Vikings. Thus, we have a new state that is commonly known as England (really, were are the Angles??? )

 

HE, HE, HE

 

I is interested As far as i know modern day Slovenia was the very farthest the Ottoman empire reached into Europe (for apt military organisation perhaps )and I wouldnt be suprised if some Vikings or Huns had made it there from the steppes

 

You should see arsenal of duchy of Styria in Graz Austria (just across the border) they still have around 10.000 suits of amour with all necessary equipment (swords, lances, arqubuses...). Slovenia (duchy of Carinthia=vojvodina Koroška (Koroshka), duchy of Carniola= vojvodina Kranjska, duchy of Styria=vojvodina Štajerska (Sthayerska) were last line of defence before Austria proper). We were also main force that broke the backbone of Ottoman army at battle of Sisak (reinforcing Croatians that were about to be kicked in the arse becouse of ____ by some of their commanders) and many Turkish pillage expeditions. Coat of turkish commander killed at Sisak was given to bishop pf Ljubljana by Adam Ravbar ( Adam the robber -he was descendant of landsknecht family - known here as roparski vitezi - robbing knights) commander of one of Carinthian detachments and is still in Ljubljana cathedral as priest mass robe.

Hungarians consider themselves as descendants of Attila's Huns. Their language is not at all even remotly similar to Slovene but is similar to Finnish language so very little Huns in us today

Theory No.1 my version of theory on Slovenes. Similar theory (Veneti theory) is also supported by some historians but is scorned since most influental historians still suppoert theory No.3
As Slovenes were once (and in Austrian Carinthia still) known as Windisch or Wendisch in german (Wend - was also old Silesian word for Slavic poeples - still beliving the old gods under supreme god Triglav (Three head) - also highest peak in Slovenia). Word has suprising similarity with word Vandal (in latin). Vandals incidently lived on Baltic coast (Gdansk area between tribes of Suebi and Pruzzi) then moved to Carinthia (Slovenia & Austria) and Dacia (Romania) before moving across europe to Spain (plundering all the way as church cronicals say ) where they stayed for a while (about 50 years) leaving their name in area of Andalusia (at that time also known as Wandalus). Learned to master the seas and then preforming largest seaborn invasion up to D-day to North africa and finally settled in area of old Carhathago. Became one of largest powers controling Tunisia, Algeria, Sicily, Sardinia). BTW they also plundered Rome in extremly orderly fashion. Unussual at the time when plundering ment burning the town to the ground - according to history they took everything including pots and pans and burned only a couple of buildings by accident (you can't efficiantly pluder if you at the same tume burn the city ). There were some accusations that Vandal king was in agreament with Attila but were never proven.
German book claimed that they were germanic but i'm not so shure as they could well be of Slavic or protoslavic tribe. It seems that nothing worth mentioning written in their language survived (most was destroyed as heretic writings by Chatolic church as they were of Aryanic version of christianity and had "open account" with chatolic church ) Also some versions of Vandal myths (like great king sleeping under some mounthain will wake up when his nation would need him is still alive here - king Matjaž (Mathias) sleeping under mountain Peca). Some historians also try to prove this theory by comparing anciant names of places that were populated by vandals with ancient Slovenic language and urn burials.
Mix them (those who chose not to emmigrate) with Scythians (terror of the steppes), Avars (protslavic tribe destroyed by Charles the Great or Charlemagne also terror of the East), some stragllers from other previous occupants of this place and end result is us.


theory No.2 by one respected Historian dr. Granda:
first wave of Slavic immigrants in early middle ages (somtimes after most of Vandals emmigrated) coming from the north (area of Poland now that sound familiar-look theory No.1) settling Czehia, Slovakia, Slovenia, Slavonia. Later wave coming across Carphatian mountains settled in Croatia and Serbia.
Word Slovenia (as in nowdays Slovenia) is first mentioned in 11 or 12th century.

Theory no.3: THE official theory - i.e. the boring one
Slaves come from south east trough Carpahatian range settling Slovenia (Karantanija), Croatia, Serbia... somewhere in 8th century. This theory has some holes in it as this place seems that was settled by slavic poeples a bit before that. This theory was supported form mid 19th century as there was large and influential movement for South Slavic state (Yugoslavia -jug (eng. yug) = south, Slavia = Slav state)

BTW old slavic names are still used:
Vesna - godess of spring also spring in Russian is still popular female name
Gorazd - I found this one only in Slovenia ( gora = mountain)
Branko short for Branislav ( Brani slavo - defending glory) or Branimir ( Brani mir - defending peace).

 

Thanks Tiso I ask because I have some Slovenian grandparents and though I 've never been there (no passport) nor speak a word... it's always nice to know your roots

 

Actually, very interesting. maybe a little off topic here, but very interesting.

Ahem - immediately after the conquest...