Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Greeks indigenous?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>
Author
Sharrukin View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain


Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1199
  Quote Sharrukin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Greeks indigenous?
    Posted: 06-Jan-2006 at 22:27

The Greeks did not adopt the Phoenician script, that's another popular myth that has no solid ground to stand on and is just one of these myths (like IE "invasions" and other similar fairy tales) that refuse to go no matter how much evidence there is to the contrary.

This is really a no-brainer.

1.  The earliest Greek alphabetic inscriptions (i.e. those which occurred before the "classic" Greek alphabet) clearly show that they developed from Phoenician characters.  Just look at the character forms of the Dipylon vase (c. 740 BC).  There is no mistaking the similarities.  They were even written from write to left, just like the Phoenician inscriptions.

2.  The very sequence of Greek letters follows that of the Phoenician letters - a,b,g,d, etc.

3.  The very names of the Greek characters (which have no meaning in Greek) come from the names of the Phoenician characters (which do have meanings).  Example:  alpha, beta, gamma, delta, etc.  are clearly derived from aleph, beth, gimmel, daleth, etc. which mean "ox-head", "house", "camel", "fish", etc.

The Greek alphabet is clearly evolved from the Linear B (which is evolved from Linear A, which bears striking resemblances with older scripts found all over the Greek area and date from the early 4th milenia and on) with some Phoenician influences. The latter apparently can be traced to the 2nd milenia interaction with the Phoenicians, and those interactions can be traced even in the Greek myths that talk about two of the (more than a dozen, actually) Greek "tribes" being of Semitic (and most specificaly Phoenician) origins.

Again, another no-brainer

1.  Any casual inquirer into comparing Linear B and alphabetic scripts can see how utterly disimiliar the two scripts are.

http://www.ancientscripts.com/linearb.html

  The only possible exception is the Linear B character resembling "t".  One problem:  The Linear B character does not even have the value of "t" but rather has the value "ro".  Even the Classic Cypriot (Greek) script (which indeed came from Linear B) shows the same kinds of disimiliarity.  One Cypriot character resembling "F" has the value "to", another character resembling a lop-sided "E" has the value "ri", and a character resembling "t" has the value "lo".  Any similiarity in sign forms therefore have nothing to do with any similiarity of sound.  The Linear and alphabetic scripts are therefore clearly, unrelated.

2.  The very nature of Linear and alphabetic scripts are different.  Alphabetic scripts were developed with the idea that one character represented one sound.  Linear scripts are what we call "syllabic" scripts.  One character represents more than one sound.  In the case of Linear B we have characters for (in example) "da", "de", "di", "do", "du", etc. as well as characters for (again in examples) "dwe", "dwo", "dwa", "nwa", "pte", "rya", etc. 

3.  Linear B did not contain characters for certain Greek sounds.  For example there is no character for "g", "kh", "b", "th", "l", etc.  Instead, the Mycenaean Greeks had to adapt Linear signs to represent those sounds. 

The evolution of the Greek script and language is evident from many fidings and those who deny to accept this either do not have evaluated (or even taken into account) the overwhelming data, or are just refusing to let go of outdated and unfounded theories of the past.

The only people who consider their findings "overwhelming" against the "outdated" and "unfounded" observations and consensus research among competent scholars are a group of marginalized "nationalist" types who wish to claim some ancient grandeur they feel their own people lack.  This is so utterly pitiful.

Back to Top
St. Francis of Assisi View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Location: Vatican City State
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 105
  Quote St. Francis of Assisi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Jan-2006 at 12:19
As far as I can make out, the Pelasgians were the indigenous people of the Aegean.

c.4500 BCE, the Thracians arrived.
c.1900-c.1200 BCE The first waves of Indo-European Greeks arrived, mixing with the Pelasgians
c.1200-1100 BCE The wave of Indo-European Illyrians arrive, mixing with the Pelasgians in modern-day Serbia, Croatia, Montenegro, Albania, and Epirus.

The Greeks were not indigenous -they speak an Indo-European language, and we have recorded waves of invaders over a 700 year time-span.

The Trojans were Pelasgian -the Trojan War was the war that destroyed the dominance of the Pelasgians and asserted that of the Hellenes.

We should keep in mind that the Hellenes mixed with Illyrians in Epirus, though recent genetic evidence shows that the Illyrians were there in greater number than the Greeks. The Thracians mixed with the Illyrians to form the Macedonians, who are not Greeks.

Modern Macedonians are not the same thing as ancient Macedonians.

And the Greeks never penetrated into Thracia or Illyria proper (that is, Croatia, Montenegro, Serbia, Bosnia, and Albania).

The Albanians are the descendants of the Illyrians, and are thus not Greek.
Back to Top
akritas View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Hegemom

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Greek Macedonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
  Quote akritas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Jan-2006 at 15:17

Sharrukin agree with your quote as about the ancient Hellenic language

The history of the Greek Language begins, as far as the surviving texts are concerned, with the Mycenaean civilization at least as early as the13 B.C. Greek dialects were attested as early as the Linear B of the Mycenaean tablets found on Crete and mainland Greece (around 1200 B.C.). After the collapse of the Mycenaean civilization (around 1200 BC) writing disappeared from Greece. In the late ninth to early 8th BC a script based on the Phoenician syllabary was introduced, with unneeded consonant symbols being reused to represent the Greek vowels.The major difreent between Phoenician and the Hellenic is that the first is Consonantal Alphabetic when the second is a C&V Alphabetic. Phoenician alphabet has no vowels. Both scripts belong in Proto-Sinaitic family tree.From the shape of the letters, it is clear that the Greeks adopted the alphabet the Phoenician script, mostly like during the late 9th BC. In fact, Hellene historian Herotodus (5th century BCE) called the Hellenic letters "phoinikeia grammata" (foinikia grammata), which means Phoenician letters When the Hellenes adopted the alphabet; they found letters representing sounds not found in Hellenic. Instead of throwing them away, they modified the extraneous letters to represent vowels. For example, the Phoenician letters 'aleph (which stood for a glottal stop) became the Greek letter alpha (which stands for [a] sound).

source: G.Christides,History of Ancient Hellenic Language,2005

 

 

 

Back to Top
akritas View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Hegemom

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Greek Macedonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
  Quote akritas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Jan-2006 at 15:39

St. Francis of Assisi

Modern Macedonians have  Slavic origin when the ancients were Hellenic. As you see defently they are not the same people.

How are you know that Trojans had Pelsgian origin?

Greeks penetrated in the Thracia, at and near the coasts  via the settlement and the founding of the ancient Greek cities-states and the Macedonian involment, specially after Alexander A.

The Greeks had also founded many colonies in the Illyria such as Epidamnos, Apollonia, Issa, Atenica, Razana, Bitola. Also  in three  others cities we had the Hellenic presency at  Corcula, Viss and Hvar. The discover of many Greek artfacts shows the Greek presence in the South Illyria. Wilks in his book The Illyrians  give as excactly the places of those discovers.



Edited by akritas
Back to Top
St. Francis of Assisi View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Location: Vatican City State
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 105
  Quote St. Francis of Assisi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Jan-2006 at 15:45
Well, the modern Macedonians are simply Bulgarian -they speak a Bulgarian language, and everything.

I conducted research into the Pelasgians some time ago, and most of it pointed to a Pelasgic origin for the Trojans. There were some Pelasgic sites and everything that had almost the same religion, artifacts, and so on, as Troy.

And I agree that the Greek penetrated near the Thracian coast, but this was after the Trojan War.

Mr. Wilkes' book is rubbish, no offense. There are plenty of other great works on the Illyrians, but he offers no analysis, and his listing of the finds is in direct contradiction with other historian's facts.

The main Greek colonies in Illyria were in Epirus, which contained both Hellenics and Illyrians.

Are you sure that Atenica, Razana, Issa, and Bitola are Greek colonies? Don't know much about them myself.

I think that Greek traders traded extensively with the Illyrians, but I don't think that the posts in Illyria were as successful as the ones in, say, Sicily.


Cheers, and Good Mental Health,
Herr Saltzman
Back to Top
akritas View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Hegemom

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Greek Macedonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
  Quote akritas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Jan-2006 at 16:06

I diasagree in your opinion as about the work of Wilkes. But is my opinion.

Epirus was the region of the South Illyria. This was my point. Of course we don't have any evidence as about the others regions.

In the mentioned cities we have found plenty of Greeks artfacts and monuments. All of these mentioned in the Hammond (Epirus) and Wilkes(probably you know the book,in the chapter that mentioned the Greeks)

Can you show me any link to read as about your claim that Trojans had Pelasgian Origin? Or more informations

I know only that in Homer's Iliad and Odyssey  Pelasgians were allies of Troy. Nothing more or less mentioned.

 



Edited by akritas
Back to Top
akritas View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Hegemom

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Greek Macedonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
  Quote akritas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Jan-2006 at 16:33

I want also to add some thinks as about the Troyans.

The culture of the Trojans It was known as Northwest Anatolian. This culture extended as far east as the River Sakaria and as far south as Ephesus in Ionia

The Hittites as you  know were  the inhabitants of western Anatolia under the general name of Luwian, and their land as Luwiya. The founding Hittite inscriptions speak of a king of Wilusa known as Alaksandush, which some have compared with Alexander, the other name of the Trojan prince Paris. Alaksandush is a natural Luwian name. The name of Paris's father Priam  has been compared with the Luwian name Piriya-muwas. As you see I think Trjans were more close in the Luwians

Back to Top
St. Francis of Assisi View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Location: Vatican City State
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 105
  Quote St. Francis of Assisi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Jan-2006 at 18:27
For more on the Troy-Pelasgian theory, see the work of Edwin Jacques -though he goes a bit far, in asserting that the Illyrians were Pelasgians.

Of course there were Greek artifacts in South Illyria, probably from trade. That doesn't mean that the Illyrians were Greek. I think we are both saying the same thing.
Cheers, and Good Mental Health,
Herr Saltzman
Back to Top
akritas View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Hegemom

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Greek Macedonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
  Quote akritas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Jan-2006 at 18:42

Personnally I don't think so that Illyrians were Pelasgians, because we know very little from both of the ancient nations. Is just an hypothesis. I will try to find your book. Do you have the title  of the book ? The google not help me to much.

Is not only artifacts but and others thinks such as ancient cemeteries and the way of the manufucture. Archaelogies staffs.

Back to Top
St. Francis of Assisi View Drop Down
Samurai
Samurai
Avatar

Joined: 05-Jan-2006
Location: Vatican City State
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 105
  Quote St. Francis of Assisi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 07-Jan-2006 at 22:13
I don't think the Pelasgians were Illyrians either.

I think that both Illyrians and Hellenes supplanted the existing Pelasgian tribes.

The book is "The Albanians" by Edwin Jacques.

A lot of it is pretty ridiculous, like that the Pelasgians were Illyrians, but it does have a convincing thesis that Trojans were Pelasgian.

BTW, do you think that the Albanians are the descendants of the Illyrians?
Cheers, and Good Mental Health,
Herr Saltzman
Back to Top
akritas View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Hegemom

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Greek Macedonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
  Quote akritas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Jan-2006 at 07:55

My opinion is that according the linguistics the Albanian language has more closest elements with the Illyrian. Of course we don't have find to much words from the latter  in order to make a better analysies. In your question any  answer is very difficult  to say any affirmative responce. I am positive for sure  but that the albanians were not kaukasian or any other hupothesis that include the Albanians as a nation out of the balkan.

Thank you for the book. I think is published in the Greece and I will read it soon as I can. But also there are several books in Greece that say the same think. Illyrians (south albanians) and Greeks were parts of the Pelasgians. So both of them are indigenous.

Back to Top
Perseas View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 14-Jan-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 781
  Quote Perseas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Jan-2006 at 13:15

Most possible explanation is Trojans to be Luwian speakers. Troy was known to Hittites as Wilusa. There is a treaty between the Hittite King Muwattalli II with the ruler of Wilusa around 1280 and it mentions the existing friendly relations between the rulers of Hattusa and Wilusa for more than 140 years from the moment the treaty was taking place.

To quote:

the basic question asked has been: where was Wilusa situated on the map of the Hittite Kingdom? The text itself leaves no doubt at all about the approximate location of Wilusa:

In 17 Alaksandu is addressed as one of four kings within the Arzawa domains: thou, Alaksandu [of Wilusa], Manabatarhunta [of Seha], Kubantakurunta [of Mira] and Urahattusa [of Haballa], and in 4 Muwattalli relates his father, Mursili [II, ca 13181290] has conquered the entire land of Arzawa and broken it up into individual states: into the states of Mira [definitely added to], Kuwaliya, Seha, Appawiya and Haballa. Wilusa was also mentioned in the same breath with Arzawa in 2.

Wilusa must, therefore, have been a neighbour of Arzawa from time immemorial and, after Arzawa was broken up, it must have been in the immediate vicinity of one of the kingdoms of the new federation of Arzawa states. Therefore, the first task must be to locate Arzawa. By 1959 the reconstruction of Hittite geography in the standard work The Geography of the Hittite Empire by J. Garstang and O.R. Gurney had led to the conclusion that Arzawa and, consequently, all states that came out of it and those that must be regarded as part of it must have been situated in western Asia Minor;

4 Wilusa was already marked on the map included in that volume as the northernmost kingdom of the Arzawa states, north of Seha, on the outhwestern fringes of the Troad .

The rest can be found here...

http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:WV0-V1yvgCcJ:www.uni-tu ebingen.de/troia/eng/wilusaeng.pdf+wilusa+troy&hl=el

If it doesnt work you can take also from here..It surely worths a read.

http://www.uni-tuebingen.de/troia/eng/lataczwilusaeng.pdf

In 1995 during excavations in Troy, there was discovered a seal dated from 1100 B.C with two names in hyeroglyphic Luwian script which supports fully the theory of the Luwian origin.

http://www.institutoestudiosantiguoegipto.com/los%20pueblos% 20del%20mar-ingles.htm

A mathematician is a person who thinks that if there are supposed to be three people in a room, but five come out, then two more must enter the room in order for it to be empty.
Back to Top
akritas View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar
Hegemom

Joined: 17-Sep-2005
Location: Greek Macedonia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1460
  Quote akritas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Jan-2006 at 15:12

Thanks Aeolus for your links. Specially for the 3nd one

Back to Top
Sharrukin View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain


Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1199
  Quote Sharrukin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 08-Jan-2006 at 18:50

It needs to be pointed out that the term "Pelasgians" as used by the ancient Greeks merely stood for peoples who shared the same original lands as they themselves and thought to be much older.  In this case, "Pelasgians" cannot really be used to pinpoint just one ethno-linguistic group, but virtually all non-Greek-speaking groups which shared the homeland.  The term itself had been used to specify even further, just the inhabitants of Arcadia and Argos, while other non-Greek tribes were given other names, such as Leleges, Dryopes, and Caucones (see Strabo, Geography, Book 7.7.1). 

This leads to another idea.  Using the generic sense of the name "Pelasgian", linguists have noted that there were place-names on both sides of the Aegean Sea which have similar non-Greek construction - i.e. those with the ending -assos, such as Parnassus in mainland Greece and Halicarnassus in southeastern Anatolia.  Some have seen this as similiar to Luwian place-names such as Pitassa, Datassa, and Tarhuntassa.  The idea then is that while the majority of Luwians may have migrated into western Anatolia from the Balkans, a branch may have migrated into Greece, where they may have been a Pelasgian group.  In other words, what to the Greeks may have been "Pelasgians" may have been in Anatolia as "Luwians".  In Homer, there were Pelasgians in the Troad (Illiad, Book 2.840-841).  One other item:  "Minyan Ware" found throughout Greece beginning about 2200 BC, under a series of destruction layers throughout Greece, such as at Lerna in the Argolid, was similiar to wares of the same period found at Troy beginning about 2300 BC, both which can be traced back to Balkan predecessors.

Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Jan-2006 at 00:06
Hmmm...

I thought that Hittites/Luwians had arrived via the Caucasus, not the Balcans. On the other hand it seems quite clear that the Cycladic culture came from Anatolia.

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
Sharrukin View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain


Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1199
  Quote Sharrukin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Jan-2006 at 03:21

Maju, there was no evidence of expansion of Pontic-Caspian cultures so deep into Anatolia from the direction of the Caucasus.  The only possible exception was the Kuro-Araxes Culture which had characteristics of the Kurgan cultures north of the Caucasus, but was restricted to Transcaucasia and further south, and is better identified with Hurrian expansion.

On the other hand, we can detect cultural drift from the northeast Balkans into Anatolia via Troy.  Ezero cultural remains (with Kurgan characteristics) have been found in the greater part of Bulgaria, western Anatolia and in the Aegean.  After this, another influx from the Balkans seemed to have occurred baring Minyan Ware into both Greece and Anatolia.  Yet a third wave from the Balkans brought Knobbed Ware into Anatolia, which some identify with the Phrygian migration.  Archaeology involving the Caucasus, however does not detect such cultural flow. 

Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 09-Jan-2006 at 06:06
While Ezero is clearly a product of early IE invasions of the Balcans, their culture does not show any typical IE (kurgan) traits. In fact it seems a hybrid of the previous substratum (Karanovo-Gumelnita) and pre-IE Ukranian elements (Dniepr-Don style burials and other cultural traits).

In fact the only culture that is by-product of the Cernavoda-I wave of IEs into the Eastern balcans that shows clear IE traits is Cotofeni, which I suspect is related to Greeks rather than Hittites.

But here I stop because I am less knowledgeable of the processes in Anatolia/Caucasus and of the Bronze Age scenarios.

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
Sharrukin View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain


Joined: 04-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1199
  Quote Sharrukin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 10-Jan-2006 at 03:09

While Ezero is clearly a product of early IE invasions of the Balcans, their culture does not show any typical IE (kurgan) traits. In fact it seems a hybrid of the previous substratum (Karanovo-Gumelnita) and pre-IE Ukranian elements (Dniepr-Don style burials and other cultural traits).

But as a matter of fact Ezero does show typical kurgan traits, including having kurgans themselves.  You are correct in describing it as a hybrid culture, but it is considered part of a complex of cultures extending from the Danube to western Anatolia which also included Baden and Cotofeni.  Because Ezero displays enough of a Kurgan tradition it is considered as a candidate for the spread of Anatolian languages into Anatolia from the Balkans.  It may be relevant to mention that the Hittite culture displayed a pronounced non-IE cultural tradition including religion and succession.  These traditions may have taken route when they were still in the Balkans.

In fact the only culture that is by-product of the Cernavoda-I wave of IEs into the Eastern balcans that shows clear IE traits is Cotofeni, which I suspect is related to Greeks rather than Hittites.

Cernavoda I does indeed show Kurgan dominance, more so than Ezero, but is still considered a hybrid culture.  Cotofeni is considered the least Kurganized of the Pontic-Caspian influenced cultures which stretched from the Danube to western Anatolia, and still displayed dominant Old European characteristics including being completely agricultural, continued use of Old European pottery traditions, and the worship of the Bird-Goddess. 

Back to Top
Perseas View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 14-Jan-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 781
  Quote Perseas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Jan-2006 at 12:11

Originally posted by Amedeo

Rebesoul, as some of you mentioned, there is the myth of the Indo-Europeans (and indeed the myth of a Proto-Indo-European language) and the myth that the Greek script is derived from Phoenician. The following post is relevant to the script issue. (I will be posting studies of mine, about languages and the invention of Proto-Indo-European, in the Archeology/Linguistics section.)

The Dispilio Tablet
http://www.mlahanas.de/Greeks/LX/DispilioTablet.html

Amedeo, there is no need to make a second topic of the same subject.

A mathematician is a person who thinks that if there are supposed to be three people in a room, but five come out, then two more must enter the room in order for it to be empty.
Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Jan-2006 at 13:19
Originally posted by Sharrukin

While Ezero is clearly a product of early IE invasions of the Balcans, their culture does not show any typical IE (kurgan) traits. In fact it seems a hybrid of the previous substratum (Karanovo-Gumelnita) and pre-IE Ukranian elements (Dniepr-Don style burials and other cultural traits).

But as a matter of fact Ezero does show typical kurgan traits, including having kurgans themselves.  You are correct in describing it as a hybrid culture, but it is considered part of a complex of cultures extending from the Danube to western Anatolia which also included Baden and Cotofeni.  Because Ezero displays enough of a Kurgan tradition it is considered as a candidate for the spread of Anatolian languages into Anatolia from the Balkans.  It may be relevant to mention that the Hittite culture displayed a pronounced non-IE cultural tradition including religion and succession.  These traditions may have taken route when they were still in the Balkans.

I was unaware that Ezero had kurgans, I thought their burials were basically in cist with ochre covering as the pre-IE Ukranians. It's most interesting to find out that the re-arrangement of Eastern Balcans followed some Kurganite logic after all.

In fact the only culture that is by-product of the Cernavoda-I wave of IEs into the Eastern balcans that shows clear IE traits is Cotofeni, which I suspect is related to Greeks rather than Hittites.

Cernavoda I does indeed show Kurgan dominance, more so than Ezero, but is still considered a hybrid culture.  Cotofeni is considered the least Kurganized of the Pontic-Caspian influenced cultures which stretched from the Danube to western Anatolia, and still displayed dominant Old European characteristics including being completely agricultural, continued use of Old European pottery traditions, and the worship of the Bird-Goddess. 



Well, Cernavoda I is more Kurganite than Serednij-Stog II, I think. But you probably know better. I was under the impression that the post-Cernavoda I partition of the Eastern Balcanic area was like this:
  • Ezero: hybrid of natives and pre-IE "Ukranians"
  • Cernavoda II/III: dominated by what seems a quasi-Bubanji-Hum culture, with some late Karanovo/Danubian touches
  • Cotofeni: kurgan with Danubian aculturization
(Note for the not-knowledgeable: Ezero occupied basically Bulgaria and coastal Thrace, Cernavoda II/III occupied Eastern Wallachia and Dobrudja, while Cotofeni was stabilished in NW Bulgaria, W. Wallachia and parts of Transylvania. East of it was the great Baden culture of native "Danubian" character, later replaced by Vucedol, which seems partly IE).


Edited by Maju

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.