Invasions and Foreign Immigration to Europe

I'm about to open a controversial topic. But beware: remember that we are talking about history here, not politics. With this I mean that the discussion of current immigration to Europe should be left out (I'm not even European for that matter).

Very well. We all know about the moorish invasions to Spain, the Reconquista, Don Pelayo, and so on (being from partial Asturian ancestry my grandfather won't get tired of telling me those stories). But what about the rest of the invasions?

You know, the north and east was invaded time to time too, it wasn't just the south. Many people take genetic tests and, being from fully European ancestry, they discover a non-European one hundreeds or thousands of years ago. Well, that means that it hapenned at least sometimes, non-European influence to Europe indeed existed.

Is there any one who already worked on this?
I looked for books and articles and wasn't lucky finding something that included all of them, so what I want now is to list them and then research them one by one.

By the way, remember that invasions such as the Viking or German one do not count because that's about Europeans invading other Europeans (and we could be ages listing all of that, Europe was historically quite a violent continent).

Just thinking about some reminds me of the Arab conquests, the Persian invasion of Greece, the Magyar invasions, the Mongol ones, the Ottomans, but I'm sure there are more, especially in the ancient times, am I wrong?

And as for normal immigration, well, we have the Gypsies for example, that cannot be called an invasions because they did not atack Europe, they just entered in the continent; though they are indeed non-European. The Jews could be added too, though most Ashkenazi and Sephardic (not Mizrahi) Jews are descended from Europeans converts.

And one more thing: is my question historically correct?
Because I mean, I doubt the Romans and Greeks considered themselves "Europeans", but since later Europeans inspired on them some historians include them in European history.

For the sake of argument let's just consider European as any civilization whose people came from Europe and was developed mainly, if not solely, here.

Thank you. Of course, Cro-Magnons arrived much later that Neanderthals. You could even say that Neanderthals are the "original Europeans", though it would be sort of weird, because they were not exactly humans. Cro-Magnons were the first modern humans to arrive Europe.

 

Originally posted by eaglecap Check out K.S. Lal in his essay about the Islamic Invasion of India. This was the origins of the gypsies who fled rather than die or convert. Being largely Hindu they were not given the choice to pay the Jiyza tax until later, like people of the book were permitted. They had only two choices convert, die, or flee.

Edited by Cryptic - 06-Mar-2010 at 08:29

They had only two choices convert, die, or flee.  

Originally posted by Ëperom Just thinking about some reminds me of the Arab conquests, the Persian invasion of Greece, the Magyar invasions, the Mongol ones, the Ottomans, but I'm sure there are more, especially in the ancient times, am I wrong?

It is important to know who are considered as Europeans, from the ancient times some Iranian-speaking peoples lived in the different regions of Europe and some of them are still there, like Jassic people who live in Hungary in Central Europe, but I think there are more ancient sources to prove there were mostly Iranian-speaking peoples in the central and eastern Europe, than Germanic, Slavic, Baltic and other modern European peoples.

Originally posted by Ëperom Thanks to everybody (nice list Opus), and Miller: while it's true that there are several types of invasions, what I'm trying to do is to list them all (whether they want to expand, loot, or whatever) to check foreign influence in Europe through invasions or immigration.For example, I know pretty well all the European, African and Asian influence that the Americas recieved, either through European colonization, African slavery or general immigration. So why shouldn't we do the same with Europe?Obviously some American countries are based on immigration like the USA, Canada, Argentina or Uruguay, and Europeans are not, but the non-European influence in Europe indeed exists and I want to research it.

Tacitus in Agricola and Germania mentions an unusual looking people in the Baltic region that lived between the Iron Age Baltic tribes. The foot notes state that they were a Stone-Age Asiatic race that lived in remote regions of the Baltics Sea. I am not sure what happened to them but they were most likely absorbed by the European Baltic Tribes.

Dear Sander! Did you ever notice as strange that all of their outposts were supposedly in the Western part of the Med.? Why have none of their remains ever been found in the East? Or maybe I should have said in the North East of the Med. area?

regards,

Originally posted by TheGreatSimba Originally posted by opuslola Dear Sander! Did you ever notice as strange that all of their outposts were supposedly in the Western part of the Med.? Why have none of their remains ever been found in the East? Or maybe I should have said in the North East of the Med. area? regards, Because that part of the world was already inhabited by strong city-states and empires... the there were no major powers in the Western Mediterranean, thats why the Greeks and Phoenocians were able to colonize those areas...Come on Opuslola, basic history here!

Dear TGS, besides Egypt, and possibly Phrygia and the mysterious Hittites, just what other "major powers" existed in the period of 1200 BCE to 1000BCE, that could have competed with or interferred with the trading mission of Phoenicia?

Years later, various Greek city states, and later Italian city states actually fought each other for outposts in the Black Sea area! But, as far as I know, there have never any Phoenician outposts found!

Sorry my "basic history" is so confused.

Regards,

Originally posted by opuslola Dear TGS, besides Egypt, and possibly Phrygia and the mysterious Hittites, just what other "major powers" existed in the period of 1200 BCE to 1000BCE, that could have competed with or interferred with the trading mission of Phoenicia? Years later, various Greek city states, and later Italian city states actually fought each other for outposts in the Black Sea area! But, as far as I know, there have never any Phoenician outposts found! Sorry my "basic history" is so confused. Regards,

Mycenae for example. My point is that these areas were already inhabited by sophisticated peoples. Just like you said, the Hittites were to the north, Mesopotamia was off limits, Egypt was to the south, the Greeks to the north east etc...

So this answers your question as to why the Phoenicians did not settle in other parts of the Eastern Mediterranean. The Western Mediterranean was open for the taking, and the Phoenicians and Greeks took advantage of this.

Also, you seem to have this misconception that the Phoenician city states were a military power, they werent. They had a significant navy, but not very powerful on land, therefore, they couldnt force the Greeks or Hittites or Egyptians off their land in order to settle. The "uncivilized" peoples of the Western Mediterranean were a different story.

Although there is one Phoenician settlement in southern Turkey:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finike


Edited by TheGreatSimba - 15-Mar-2010 at 11:13