The  last I have read about the Mycenae civilization or more precisely about  the Late Bronze Age is that all those nations, and civilizations
were rather killed by a persistent drought lasting nearly 250 years.

This late information has been possible because we had developed diverse ways to measure past temperatures with diverse methods.  We had been extracting undersea mud cores and for this period the
temperature of the surface of the Sea in the Easter and West Mediterranean had been a few degrees colder.  Other samples extracted from the Red Sea and near the Gulf of Oman had produced as well lower temperatures om the sea surface.  Also samples from the Dead Sea and from some speleothermes  in a cave in Syria.  They take samples from stalactites and are able to tell the temperature for some period of time.  In cases of drought they can see that the stalactites had ceased to grow.
Th destructions, the fires, were the desperation of some warrying
people searching for food. 

You can see a video on this
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyry8mgXiTk

Or this one

Documentary Film ║ Bronze Age Collapse ★ 2016 (New)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJ0m0Gr1-fI

I think this recent information would solve most of the problems.

My idea is that during a time, this land was almost inhabited because of the drought.  As the situation become better, population was recovering and new immigrants arrived with iron arms.  This people was a real minority and became the new masters of the land.  They probably spoke and IE language like the previous people that were also bronze age immigrants.   The language was not that different.

The aristocratic classes were the warriors and the rest were peasants and herders to provide food for the warriors.

Leopoldo 

  

Originally posted by akritas According Herodotus mother home of Dorians (Hylleis, Pamphyloi, and the Dymanes) during the Deucalion Kingdom were in the Pthiotis (middle Greece, close to Thessalia)  and during Doros Kingdom were in the Histiaiotis (Thessalia) region. When Cadmeians they turned out from there, Dorians it dwelt in Pindos and was called Makednian. Thence moved afterwards to Dryopis (middle Greece)  and from Dryopis it came finally to Peloponnesus (displacing the native Achaeans), and began to be called Dorian. Dorians was a tribe migrated from its place to other and  in any direction (Macedonia, Thessaly, Peloponnisos, Rhodos, Crete  e.t.c.). Now if we accept Herodotus work, Mythology (as you said) and finally the archaeological data, we found that Dorians never invaded outside to inside. The Dorians originated from north, northwestern Greece ( Macedonia and Epirus). From these points they began to invade toward the south, into the center of mainland Greece, and then to the Peloponnesian, and the southern Aegean islands. Once their invasions of central Greece ceased, their descent to southern Greece produced waves of invasions through the Peloponnesus, into Crete, and westward to Rhodes. Dorian invasion in the Peloponnese is dated on the basis of the catalogues of the Spartan kings to 1148 B.C. or 1104 B.C. according to two different calculations, that little differ from the years 1125 B.C. or 1120 B.C. provided by archaeological data concerning the same event more in http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5730& ;PN=6

and it is said that the third race, the Dorians,
reached Crete under the leadership of Tektamos,
the son of Doros. And indeed it is said that the
greater part of these peoples were gathered in
the region around Mount Olympus

Pelopids and Heraclids � the "Dorian Invasion" 1

Upon the death of Eurystheus an oracle tells the Mycenaeans to choose a Pelopid king and Atreus and Thyestes � already installed in nearby Midea by Sthenelus � contend for the prize. Atreus eventually wins out and his son, Orestes, returns to Mycenae and seizes the throne from Aletes, son of Aegisthus.

• Orestes expanded his kingdom to include all of Argos, and he became king of Sparta by marrying Hermione, his cousin and the daughter of Menelaus and Helen. Finally, Tisamenus, Orestes' son by Hermione, the daughter of Helen, inherits the throne.
• The Heracleidae ("children of Heracles") return to the Peloponnese, led by Hyllus, the son of Heracles, and Iolaus, Heracles' nephew, and contend with the Pelopidae ("children of Pelops") for possession of the Peloponnese.
• The Heracleidae base their claim to power on their descent, through Heracles, from Perseus, the founder of Mycenae, whereas Tisamenus was a Pelopid whom the Heracleidae regard as a usurper.

The Dorian Invasion 2

After a year, the Heracleidae are driven out by plague and famine. Upon consulting the Delphic oracle, they were told that they had returned before their proper time: the god said they should await "the third crop."  Accordingly, after three years, the Heracleidae invade the Peloponnese again, and Hyllus challenges the Peloponnesians to single-armed combat. In the ensuing duel with Echemus, king of Arcadia, Hyllus is killed and the Heracleidae undertake to withdraw for fifty years. The Heracleidae invade again, under the leadership of Aristomachus, the son of Hyllus and Heracles' grandson. But Aristomachus is slain in combat with Tisamenus and his army, and the Heracleidae withdraw once again. Upon consulting the oracle again, the Heracleidae are told that "the third crop" referred to the third generation of Heracles' descendants. The Return of the Heracleidae under Heracles' great-grandsons is finally successful � although Aristodemus is slain by a thunderbolt, and his sons Procles and Eurysthenes assume leadership of his forces. Temenus, Procles and Eurysthenes (the sons of Aristodemus), and Cresphontes cast lots for the kingdoms. Temenus becomes master of Argos, Procles and Eurysthenes of Sparta, and Cresphontes of Messenia. Cresphontes secured the rule of Messenia for himself by the following stratagem: it was agreed that the first drawing of lots was for Argos, the second for Lacedaemon, and the third for Messenia. Both Temenus and the sons of Aristodemus throw stones into a pitcher of water, but Cresphontes cast in a clod of earth; since it was dissolved in the water, the other two lots turned up first.

Edited by chicagogeorge - 12-Jun-2007 at 09:16

Originally posted by St. Francis of Assisi So, Maju, you are saying that even though there is no evidence of a Dorian invasion, you are going to believe it anyway?

We do have an evidence of Dorian invasion: their presence. What we don't have is any evidence, not even an indication of any Sicilian or Etruscan or Trojan or Hittite invasion whatsoever.

If the pottery, etc. was characteristic of the Dorians, and there were two Dorian arrivals, according to you, why do the remains of the Dorians only appear in the latter of the two, and not in the first? Illogical, no? And if the Dorians did not leave remains either time, then why is it that the class structure changes only in their "second" arrival?

I don't know. I haven't studied the phenomenon so much in depth.

How do you know that the class structure changes only in what you call "second arrival"?

How do you know that the pottery that you call "Dorian" was original of Dorians? Have you found it in the regions of origin of the Dorians, namely Northern Greece? Have you found a pattern of cultural movement from Northern to Southern Greece and find that this pottery is part of it?

I don't. But maybe you have more evidence that I ignore.

Why can't a war result in both sides being destroyed? Because destruction of one side is brought on by the other side. When one side is destroyed, it can no longer destroy the other side. The result of this reasoning is that Peloponese was conqured by some outside power or that it fell under the rulling of a single Peloponesean city, and that the remains of this city have not yet been discovered. This unknown city would then be the only one that was conqured by the Dorians. But I doubt that, I believe Francis is right about the Dorians being only a migration.

My proof of that is the myth of Cyclop Walls. Greeks from later period (Dorians) believed these walls to be built by giants, which they would of known wasn't true if they had fought with the people who actually did build them (Acheans). Therefore, Achean civilization was destroyed before the Dorian arrival. 

Before the historical Etruscans. The prince Tyrrhenus arrived during the Trojan War, so it shows that the name "Tyrrhenoi" was in use as early as 1180 BC.

But this thread is on the Dorians.

I would like you to answer all my points regarding the Dorians, or to declare that you are mistaken in your belief that they invaded Greece. Enough avoiding.

If they never sacked anything, then they were not an invasion but a migration. If they were a migration, then they arrived c.1140 BC. That is what I have been trying to say all along.

Tyrrhenian was applied to the Etruscans because of the sea, and not vice-versa. It was always called the "Tyrrhenian" sea. The tribes coming thence were called the Tyrrhenoi, even before the Etruscans.

How is it transparent for you when you persist in spite of all the evidence to think that a Dorian invasion occurred?

I am reposting this so you can answer it. If you cannot answer it, then you should logically compromise your beliefs.

I'd like to review the evidence for a Dorian invasion: Myths regarding a militaristic arrival of the sons of Heracles, presumably the Dorians. The introduction of new cultural elements, including cremations, different swords, iron, and different styles of pottery, into Mycenaean civilization. The collapse of Mycenaean civilization due to warfare. On #1: Heracles was the epomynous Dorian hero, like Theseus was the Ionian hero.  His "saga" was used by the Dorians to show a natural "ascendancy" of their tribe. The myths were propoganda devices. The identification of the Dorians as the "sons of Heracles" returning to "overthrow usurpers" certainly struck a chord in the Greek world, and was probably a propoganda device for justifying the arrival of the Dorians. However, to take it literally as fact is ridiculous. On #2: All these elements are introduced after 1140 BC at the earliest. It is not unreasonable that there was a migration of Dorians around this time. However, to suggest that it was an invasion is a big leap, mainly because evidence of this nature is typical of a migration, and evidence of an invasion is not present. On #3: This destruction occurred mainly 1220-1190 BC, with a destruction of 1170 BC at the latest. As you see, the destruction occurred earlier than the arrival of the Dorians. If the arrival of the Dorians is marked by said cultural characteristics, then they would have been introduced to Greece when the Dorians arrived -and they are not present at the time the palaces and cities were destroyed. Logically, then, the Dorians could not have destroyed Mycenaean civilizaiton. The evidence for a Dorian invasion is contradictory and weak. The evidence for a migration is much stronger. The long-held tenet that the Dorians destroyed the Mycenaeans is simply no longer an acceptable hypothesis in the face of this contradictory evidence.

Yes I do. But note that this topic is about the Dorians, and you are simply throwing up a smoke-screen to avoid responding to the evidence regarding the Dorians.

There is no evidence that Sardinia was assailed by invaders c.1300 BC. There is no reason to believe the Shardana are not Sardinians. The ancient Sardinians were already making long-distance voyages, having trade contacts with the Mycenaeans and Egyptians, as shown by the artifacts found in Sardinia and also the "Giant's Tombs" which contain images of sea-going vessels. In fact, the Sardinian civilization was flourishing from 1600 to 1200, and there is no evidence of any destruction in 1300. It was only after 1200 that the culture declines, and is revived after 300 years. There is no reason for them to migrate to the Balearic Islands, no reason for them to be on the defensive. You are making baseless speculations.

When did I say that the Etruscans were the Sea Peoples? Tyrrhenian refers to all the cultures of the Tyrrhenian Sea, so it is possible that the Sardinians were the Teresh and Shardana.

There is no archaeology to complement your account, because your account is baseless speculation ignoring all archaeological evidence.

The average rate of nuraghes emerging per year remains at about ~75 until 1200 BC. There is no interruption. You somehow say that the Sardinians were conquered 1300 BC, and migrated to the Balearic Islands -but this does not explain why their civilization was uninterrupted during this time period, nor why megalithism in the Balearic Islands has more similarity with its Iberian than Sardinian counterpart. Your theory is flawed.

Nor have I ever proposed that the Sea Peoples destroyed Aegean civilization. I will make my position on the Sea Peoples clearer:

"The Sea Peoples" as we know them were simply a confederacy. The "core" were three tribes from Italy, the Teresh, Shardana, and Shekelesh -these allied with desperate mercanaries and refugees from war in the Aegean and famine in Libya. Their "allies", the other tribes of the Sea Peoples, probably outnumbered the main core, but the point is that they were a power that sacked and pillaged the E. Med.

As for the Dorian "invasion", I would like to see an answer to it by someone who believes there was such an invasion, e.g. Maju.

Thessaly and Macedonia were not very rich at that time and probably were not involved in the Aegean wars, so their defence capabilities were free to deal with the Sea People. This made them a less desirable target. Seems I haven't been clear enough, there was no conquest of anyone by the Sea People, only sackings. Sea People never fought a land battle that would of been necesary for conquest of the Peloponesean cities.

The philosophy of the Sea People was not "we came, we defeated, we ruled" but "we came, we pillaged, we left home".