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

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Were the Greeks indigenous?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>
Author
dorian View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 20-May-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 370
  Quote dorian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Were the Greeks indigenous?
    Posted: 03-Oct-2005 at 05:35

When Solon had gone to Egypt, the Egyptian priests told him about the terrible earthquakes in Greece and the disaster of the Greek nation which lived in Greece 9,000 years before that time and that the Athenian civilization and culture was much older than the Egyptian one.

 

According to this, the Greeks were indigenous, didnt come to Greece from northern Europe, all the tribes in Greece, the Pelasgians etc were greek and that after the sinkage of Aegeis , the some Greeks managed to survive on the top of the mountains of Aegeis which are the present islands of Aegean. Because of their necessity to communicate with the other Greeks they developed the navigation and they rebuilt the Aegean civilisation. Crete was the dominant, the Cretans and the other Greeks spread their culture around Mediterranean.

Whats your opinion about this aspect of history? Did the Egyptians indeed are right?



Edited by dorian
"We are Macedonians but we are Slav Macedonians.That's who we are!We have no connection to Alexander the Greek and his Macedonia�Our ancestors came here in the 5th and 6th century" Kiro Gligorov FYROM
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: 03-Oct-2005 at 13:58
That's the story of Atlantis. Why do you take it out of context? 

It's obvious that Atlantis, whichever Iberian civilization it refers to, can't be 9000 before Plato because at that time there were no civilizations of any kind anywhere. So something is wrong with the dates. Forget about  that part.

Now in confirmed Greek times (that's in Mycenean, Dorian and classical Greece times) you can find Iberian civilizations ("outside the pillars of Herakles") that can well fit much of the description for Atlantis. One could be the culture of Vila Nova de Sao Pedro (c. 2600-1300 BCE) and the other could be the later Tartessian civilization (whose capital city has yet to be unearthed) but this one traded mainly with Phoenicians.

I think that Greeks were Greeks (Greek-speakers) since Mycenean times. There's a slim possibility that they were also Greek-speaking before but it is highly unlikely, considering the diferences between Mycenean culture and the previous local cultures.

But you can well place the legends about Atlantis and Erythia in the Late Bronze Age (Near Eastern chronology, Middle Bronze Age in pan-European chronology) well, mutatis mutandis. Remember that Egyptians knew almost nothing about navigation though they were probably good recorders. Whatever the Egyptians knew it should have come from other sources and maybe was contaminated/mixed since the very start: get references from a far western city, add to that the explosion of Thera and the inasions of the Sea Peoples, shake well and serve cold... with a grain of salt, of course.

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Oct-2005 at 14:37

Originally posted by Maju


It's obvious that Atlantis, whichever Iberian civilization it refers to,

WHAT ??

got any proof?? nope

neway 'twas funny reading it

Back to Top
Augustus View Drop Down
Immortal Guard
Immortal Guard
Avatar

Joined: 06-Sep-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 0
  Quote Augustus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Oct-2005 at 15:40

The greek civilization of the 5th century B.C.,the Golden Age of Pericles and Athens,it all begun back in the 12th-11th century B.C. That was the time wenn the ionian,aeolian and dorian "tribes" came from the north and settled into the mainland and the aegian isles.

The former civilizations were indigenous indeed,but not realy greek. The ancient greek language we learn in our schools is not the one of the Minoan and Micenean civilizations,but of the latter greek tribes. 

We can say however that there is a great connection between the 2 mentioned ethnic groups,as there are many common customs,such as the burial proccess,the weapons and the religion,but we cant say that the populations before the coming of the Dorians in 1100 B.C. were "greek".We know them as aegean civilizations.

Sed primum vivere...
Back to Top
Abyssmal Fiend View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun
Avatar

Joined: 18-Aug-2004
Location: Germany
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 233
  Quote Abyssmal Fiend Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Oct-2005 at 16:24
That's hard to believe, as the Spartans, who were "Greek," were a direct result of the Doric Migration, which also caused the downfall of Mycenaea.

Di! Ecce hora! Uxor mea me necabit!
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: 03-Oct-2005 at 16:52
Originally posted by Augustus

The greek civilization of the 5th century B.C.,the Golden Age of Pericles and Athens,it all begun back in the 12th-11th century B.C. That was the time wenn the ionian,aeolian and dorian "tribes" came from the north and settled into the mainland and the aegian isles.

The former civilizations were indigenous indeed,but not realy greek. The ancient greek language we learn in our schools is not the one of the Minoan and Micenean civilizations,but of the latter greek tribes. 

We can say however that there is a great connection between the 2 mentioned ethnic groups,as there are many common customs,such as the burial proccess,the weapons and the religion,but we cant say that the populations before the coming of the Dorians in 1100 B.C. were "greek".We know them as aegean civilizations.



Mycenean and late Minoan (linear B users) were Greek-speakers that's for sure. Early Minoan (linear A) and others surely not but it's dificult to prove beyond doubt.

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
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: 03-Oct-2005 at 17:00
Originally posted by hansel

Originally posted by Maju


It's obvious that Atlantis, whichever Iberian civilization it refers to,

WHAT ??

got any proof?? nope

neway 'twas funny reading it



What's the problem with that? It's the most logical thing to think: there were several Iberian civilizations (that is: with cities) archaeologically proven since c. 2600 BCE. Pick up the one that better appeals your concept of Atlantis or Erythia. Iberia definitively had the mineral riches attributed to Atlantis and at least since 1500 but more probably since much earlier was in contact with the Eastern Mediterranean. It was also in contact with all Atlantic Europe (Megalithism, Bell-Beaker and Atlantic Bronze succesively) up to Scandinavia (amber imports) and undetermined parts of Africa (ivory and ostrich egg-shell imports).

But obviously this didn't happen 11,500 years ago, when not even the Near East had a single town been built.

Note: check my draft article on Ancient Iberia for more info: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5798& ;PN=1


Edited by Maju

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
dorian View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 20-May-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 370
  Quote dorian Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Oct-2005 at 17:59

Maju,

the Iberian civilisation is off the point.

Augustus,

the Dorians weren't the first Greeks who lived in Greece but the Ionians and Acheans from the beginning of the 2nd millennium.

The Egyptians told Solon that the Greeks of the classic times didn't know or remember their own past because after the earthquake the people who survived were peasants without a high level of education. So, how could the Egyptians know something like that and what' the reason for not telling the truth? Maybe the Pelasgians and Aegeans were a relative nation with the Greeks. But in my opinion the decipherment of the Linear A will give answers. Don't forget that before the decipherment of Linear B the Myceneans, Ionians and Acheans were not considered Greeks.

"We are Macedonians but we are Slav Macedonians.That's who we are!We have no connection to Alexander the Greek and his Macedonia�Our ancestors came here in the 5th and 6th century" Kiro Gligorov FYROM
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: 03-Oct-2005 at 18:11

One answer whether Greeks are indigenous or not, is giving Isocrates in Panegyricus.

#For we did not become dwellers in this land by driving others out of it, nor by finding it uninhabited, nor by coming together here a motley horde composed of many races; but we are of a lineage so noble and so pure that throughout our history we have continued in possession of the very land which gave us birth, since we are sprung from its very soil and are able to address our city by the very names which we apply to our nearest kin; #

http://www.bakeru.edu/faculty/jrichards/World%20Civ%20I/E-So urce%2010-Isocrates.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
conon394 View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 08-Dec-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 165
  Quote conon394 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 03-Oct-2005 at 18:29

Ionians and Acheans were not considered Greeks

By whom, the Ionians were certainly considered Greeks in the classical and archaic classical periods.  If by Acheans you mean the Achaeans in the Peloponnesian peninsula they were certainly Greeks or if you mean Homeric Acheans than they essentially collapse to Ionians.

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: 03-Oct-2005 at 18:39
Originally posted by dorian

The Egyptians told Solon that the Greeks of the classic times didn't know or remember their own past because after the earthquake the people who survived were peasants without a high level of education. So, how could the Egyptians know something like that and what' the reason for not telling the truth? Maybe the Pelasgians and Aegeans were a relative nation with the Greeks. But in my opinion the decipherment of the Linear A will give answers. Don't forget that before the decipherment of Linear B the Myceneans, Ionians and Acheans were not considered Greeks.



Are you sure? Athens and Thebes among other cities trace their roots to the Mycenean age, when they were already important. I don't think it was any earthquake which erased the memory of Greek history but the fact that Greeks didn't kept written records but just orally-transmitted mythological legends during the Dark Ages. The only piece of history that survived was then the Homeric stories and other obscure references embedded in mythological accounts, like the Heraklean legends, etc. With the Dorian invasions, Greece descended into a semi-barbaric period that seemingly erased most memory of its Mycenean past.

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
Alkiviades View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 01-Sep-2005
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 469
  Quote Alkiviades Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Oct-2005 at 05:19

Very interesting subject. The migration theories in the distant antiquity seem to be crumbling down really fast, and the current trend seems to be to accept only fairly documented migrations and not those that are based on extremely scarce and fragmented evidence.

 

Having said that, I want to address a couple of issues 

 

Maju, archeological findings in the Iberian area do not indicate that any significant (in the large scale, every culture is significant at its own) civilization was present there in the early antiquity. So, your assumption that Plato talks about an Iberian civilization is not supported by any kind of evidence.

 

 Also, the Greeks considered the Pelasgians Greek and I really have difficulties understanding why we can�t accept it? Why would anyone � and especially people as strong-opinioned and proud of their heritage, not to mention purists and quite chauvinist at that, like the Greeks � in antiquity claim an ancestry that�s not theirs?  It�s not like today, when some ethnic groups need to facilitate claims on land or other benefits � they had the land and nobody could drive them out. Why state, in the most profound and decisive way, that the Pelasgians (as in: the pre-Mycenaean inhabitants of Greece) are Greek. Certain city states, like the Athenians, claim direct ancestry from the Pelasgians and pride over the purity of the Pelasgic blood!

 

Augustus,

The first culture of we have written records from in the Greek area, is the Mycenaean. So, we just do not know if the previous cultures were Greek-speaking (whatever Greek was back then) or not. We just have nothing to base any sort of assumptions on this.

 

What we do have though is this: the archaeological findings. Those point out in the most decisive manner that there is no great, earthshaking discontinuity in the development of the culture in the Helladic area, at least not after the Mesolithic area. From 6.000 BC on we have a more or less consistent continuity, culminating in the Mycenaean culture and then we have a drawback (mostly we assume its a drawback because there is lack of adequate written sources) for 2-3 centuries, before the city-states picked up the rabble of the Palace culture and continue into what we've learned to be the Greek culture.

 

The archaeological evidence for this is extremely concise and decisive. The chance to have a mass-scale invasion (or "invasion") of Greek-speaking tribes in a non-Greek speaking land (as the migration theories suggest) are very, very slim in the times past Mesolithic.

 

Abyssmal Fiend

The Doric migration has more recently been recognized as a shifting of population from parts of the Helladic area into other parts of the same land. The Dorian have not descended from somewhere far north, but as every piece of evidential material tells us, they were living among the Myceneans in the same timeframe. Probably, the "Doric invasion" should be more accurately described as "the Doric uprising". They did cause the fall of the palace culture by this uprise and established their supremacy at areas formerly Achaean (Peloponese, Crete, Doris).

 

 Maju

But obviously this didn't happen 11,500 years ago, when not even the Near East had a single town been built.


 

In the near East, there are cities (not towns in the Iberian fashion, of 600-800 inhabitants tops, but actual cities, maybe even up to 5.000 people large) dating 30.000 years back. They had metallurgy 30.000 years back too. So if there is one single contestant for the Myth of Atlantis being real it is located in that are. Nowhere else (at least not anywhere we can find it right now). If we accept the "beyond the Iraklian pilars" argument, we would probably have to go to the Americas, as the only really ancient ruins outside the middle east lie in Peru.


 

BTW there is clearly a very strong argument in favour of the cataclysm  whatever that was. Cultures from all over the world have a tradition of a cataclysm and they are really not connected to each other (Greeks, Hebrew, Hopi Indians, Indians  of India  aboriginal cultures in the south-eastern Asia, south Africa and many, many more). Most scientists date the cataclysm to the period of the ice melting, 10.000 years ago. Thats pretty concise with Plato's (actually: the Egyptians) dating.


damn, just saw how the text appeared, with all those smilies and stuff... is this a problem with text formulated on word?

 

Edited by Alkiviades
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: 04-Oct-2005 at 07:21
In the near East, there are cities (not towns in the Iberian fashion, of 600-800 inhabitants tops, but actual cities, maybe even up to 5.000 people large) dating 30.000 years back. They had metallurgy 30.000 years back too.


In your dreams: The oldest town of the World may be Jericho and dates to about 8000 years BCE.

Regarding the Iberian cities, it's clear that Los Millares alone must have got several thousand people living in. I call them cities because that what they would have been called in medieval times. I only call cities to the largest ones, there were many others that can only be refered as towns.

Cultures from all over the world have a tradition of a cataclysm...


False: Basque tradition has no reference whatsoever to any cataclysm. The closer reference you can found to something of the like is one obscure myth on Baiona Zar (Old Bayonne), which was supposed to be located near Hondarribia (Fuenterraba) until the rock on which it seated felt to the sea (due to erosion, I assume). Nothing more.

The only true apocalyptic myth is about the arrival of Christianity, when Jentilak (the gentiles, a mythic race of stone-throwing giants, which are obviously the mere memory of Pagan Basques mixed with some Greco-Roman stuff maybe) buried themselves inside a megalith or cave or threw themselves down a cliff. Its meaning is obviously the burial of the old religion due to the menace of a powerful foreign force: Kixmi (Christ).

But there's no reference to destruction by earthquakes, volcanoes floods or drought like in other cultures. Not a single one. The only destructive force that appears once and again in myths is Christianity.
 


Edited by Maju

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
Alkiviades View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 01-Sep-2005
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 469
  Quote Alkiviades Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Oct-2005 at 08:07

Originally posted by Maju

In your dreams: The oldest town of the World may be Jericho and dates to about 8000 years BCE.

I am quite sorry to burst your bubble, but in parts of modern Turkey and Mesopotamia and also in India, there have been discovered ruins dated (using very precise methods) from 20.000 to 30.000 BC. And I find the reference "in your dreams" to be quite offending... why do you have to insult? Did I say "you are insane if you think Iberian cities are older"?

Regarding the Iberian cities, it's clear that Los Millares alone must have got several thousand people living in. I call them cities because that what they would have been called in medieval times. I only call cities to the largest ones, there were many others that can only be refered as towns.

Los Millares is considered the oldest town on the Iberian peninsula. It is quite an impressive finding, nevertheless, but it is waaaaaay too young to have anything to do with our quest for "the oldest city" or a culture that could be attributed the Atlantic myth with. Los Millares was not nearly "several thousand people large", the site nowadays is a couple acres large, including the burial ground! Maybe a couple thousand people at best. Last but not least: Its prime (the time when the megalithical tombs were created) was close to 2.200 BC (it's history seems to beging around 2800 BC). That's 1.000 years after Knossos (a city of more than 20.000, by the more modest estimations) was build and about 4.000 years after several settlements in the area that is now Greece came into existence.

And these are only settlements in Europe and we all (should) know that the civilization came last in Europe - Asia developed civilization looooong before Europe. And urban culture as well.


False: Basque tradition has no reference whatsoever to any cataclysm. The closer reference you can found to something of the like is one obscure myth on Baiona Zar (Old Bayonne), which was supposed to be located near Hondarribia (Fuenterraba) until the rock on which it seated felt to the sea (due to erosion, I assume). Nothing more.

The only true apocalyptic myth is about the arrival of Christianity, when Jentilak (the gentiles, a mythic race of stone-throwing giants, which are obviously the mere memory of Pagan Basques mixed with some Greco-Roman stuff maybe) buried themselves inside a megalith or cave or threw themselves down a cliff. Its meaning is obviously the burial of the old religion due to the menace of a powerful foreign force: Kixmi (Christ).

But there's no reference to destruction by earthquakes, volcanoes floods or drought like in other cultures. Not a single one. The only destructive force that appears once and again in myths is Christianity. 

Very wrong. Because the Basque oral tradition does not have any reference to a cataclysm, the world has never experienced one? The world is quite larger than Iberia, you know.

Why don't you check out some sites, if you don't want to for relevant  books? Look for references on the Hopi Indians, look for Cataclysm+India, look for cataclysm+Polynesia, cataclysm+Africa, check out the Greek myth of creation (Hesiod) and then talk about "myths in christianity".  Of course the Sumerian, Egyptian, Chaldean and Hittite also have a tradition of cataclysm but I don't even mention them due to the proximity to the Hebrew (could be a local phenomenon, right?)

 The whole globe has a mythology of cataclysm, even though you seem to be in denial generally. The Basques, despite what you believe, are not the most ancient culture on earth - far from it. They are just the most ancient not-too-intermixed ethnic group on Europe - and that's a very different thing altogether. Hebrew, Indian, Greek, Egyptian, Mesopotamian and numerous others are much, much older cultures than the Basque. And as far as I know, Basque written language is a rather recent development... so they have never recorded anything prior to that.

When you don't know something, you should ask or search for data, not deny it's existence just because you never happened to hear about it. Alright my enthusiastic Iberian friend?

Back to Top
Phallanx View Drop Down
Chieftain
Chieftain
Avatar

Joined: 07-Feb-2005
Location: Greece
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1283
  Quote Phallanx Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Oct-2005 at 08:24
Interesting topic...

AUTOXTHONES ESMEN (we are autochthonous)... as they used to say

It is clear that the Hellines considered the Pelasgians nothing but a part of the Hellinic 'race'. While many modern scholars tend to  base their arguments on Herodotus' text that mentions a probable difference in language, they conveniently overlook (I hope not intentionally) the fact that in his book :
1 chap 58 he clearly mentions :

"But the Hellenic stock, it seems clear to me, has always had the same language since its beginning; yet being, when separated from the Pelasgians"

So the simple question to be asked is if they had no connection what so ever, why would he speak of separation???
A second question would be: why overlook this, that is a clear statement attributed as fact and instead base all argument on what he clearly states are mere speculations???

We could also look up Dionysus of Halikarnassos that tells us in his Roman Antiquities 1:17:

"for the Pelasgians, too, were a Greek nation originally from the Peloponnesus."
---
Anyway, as to the Hellines believing they were autochthonous we have many such accounts in texts, some of many examples.

Aeschylus Hiketides (Suppliants)

For I am Pelasgus, offspring of Palaechthon, whom the earth brought forth, and lord of this land; and after me, their king, is rightly named the race of the Pelasgi, who harvest the land. Of all the region through which the pure.  Strymon flows, on the side toward the setting sun, I am the lord. There lies within the limits of my rule the land of the Perrhaebi, the parts beyond Pindus close to the Paeonians, and the mountain ridge of Dodona; the edge of the watery sea borders my kingdom. I rule up to these boundaries.
---
Note Palaechthon paleo= old and cthonios =under/from the ground
----

Eurypides ION 589:

It is said that the famous Athenians are natives of the land,  not a foreign race,
----------
The exact word used is autochthonos
-----------------

Which is why the Athenians as Thukydides tells us in 2:85:

"and fastening a knot of their hair with a tie of golden grasshoppers, a fashion which spread to their Ionian kindred, and long prevailed among the old men there."

The golden grasshopper or the cicada was worn by the Athenians as a symbol of their autochthonous origin even before the time of Solon because they considered the cicada's to have sprung from the earth just as their forefathers did
------------------

Dionysus of Halikarnassos  in his Roman antiquities 1:17

"For they first lived in the neighbourhood of the Achaean Argos, as it is now called, being natives of the country,"

The word in the original text is 'autochthones", translated as "natives"
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.
Back to Top
Decebal View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar
Digital Prometheus

Joined: 20-May-2005
Location: Canada
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1791
  Quote Decebal Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 04-Oct-2005 at 09:55

Alkiviades, would you please provide references for those cities in Turkey, Mesopotamia and India which supposedly existed 30000 years ago? And which supposedly had metallurgy.

The oldest cities that I've ever heard about are atal huyuk in Turkey and Jericho in Palestine, neither of which is older than 9000BC. How cities could have existed before the agricultural revolution is beyond me, but I'm curious to see if you can prove otherwise. Oh, and what are these very precise dating methods that you are talking about? C14 dating starts to get quite tricky beyond 20000 years and cannot be used beyond 50000. As far as metallurgy, I'd be extremely amazed if such techniques existed 10000 years ago, let alone 30000.

Maju, the Iberian civilizations are not the only possible explanation for Atlantis. And yes indeed, just because the Basque oral tradition does not have any mention of a cataclysm, that does not mean that other civilizations don't.

While we're on the topic of cataclysms though, I'd like to point out that various cataclysms are common enough. The memory of them has been preserved for the most part orally, which is a very inaccurate way to preserve the date, and even the scale of the  cataclysm. So just because many cultures have memories of cataclysms, that does not mean that these cataclysms were simultaneous or related in any way. Also, if we examine these myths in more detail, we'll see that in fact there are huge differences between these myths. Enthusiasts will be pressed to find similarities between various myths, but they are only too quick to gloss over the differences.

What is history but a fable agreed upon?
Napoleon Bonaparte

Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.- Mohandas Gandhi

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: 04-Oct-2005 at 18:17
Originally posted by Alkiviades

Originally posted by Maju

In your dreams: The oldest town of the World may be Jericho and dates to about 8000 years BCE.

I am quite sorry to burst your bubble, but in parts of modern Turkey and Mesopotamia and also in India, there have been discovered ruins dated (using very precise methods) from 20.000 to 30.000 BC. And I find the reference "in your dreams" to be quite offending... why do you have to insult? Did I say "you are insane if you think Iberian cities are older"?


I said that because you give no proof of your fancy theories. I meant to be cutting, not exactly insulting.

Regarding the Iberian cities, it's clear that Los Millares alone must have got several thousand people living in. I call them cities because that what they would have been called in medieval times. I only call cities to the largest ones, there were many others that can only be refered as towns.

Los Millares is considered the oldest town on the Iberian peninsula. It is quite an impressive finding, nevertheless, but it is waaaaaay too young to have anything to do with our quest for "the oldest city" or a culture that could be attributed the Atlantic myth with. Los Millares was not nearly "several thousand people large", the site nowadays is a couple acres large, including the burial ground! Maybe a couple thousand people at best. Last but not least: Its prime (the time when the megalithical tombs were created) was close to 2.200 BC (it's history seems to beging around 2800 BC). That's 1.000 years after Knossos (a city of more than 20.000, by the more modest estimations) was build and about 4.000 years after several settlements in the area that is now Greece came into existence.

And these are only settlements in Europe and we all (should) know that the civilization came last in Europe - Asia developed civilization looooong before Europe. And urban culture as well.


How much is an "acre" in metric system?

According to all sources the minimal population for still ill-excavated Los Millares was of 1000 people, but I'm positive it had many more. (http://usuarios.lycos.es/losmillares/ - in Spanish).

I've never said that such city was older than others. I actually give a quite precise and commonly accepted as prudent date for the start of it: 2600 BCE. This date is also valid for other early Iberian sites like Zambujal (VNSP).

That some of these cities could be linked to the legends of atlantis and Erythia has nothing to do with their antiquity as it is obvious that 9,000 years before Plato there was no city at all in the whole planet (there was no even agriculture!). So the dates given in Plato's narration must be wrong.

False: Basque tradition has no reference whatsoever to any cataclysm. The closer reference you can found to something of the like is one obscure myth on Baiona Zar (Old Bayonne), which was supposed to be located near Hondarribia (Fuenterraba) until the rock on which it seated felt to the sea (due to erosion, I assume). Nothing more.

The only true apocalyptic myth is about the arrival of Christianity, when Jentilak (the gentiles, a mythic race of stone-throwing giants, which are obviously the mere memory of Pagan Basques mixed with some Greco-Roman stuff maybe) buried themselves inside a megalith or cave or threw themselves down a cliff. Its meaning is obviously the burial of the old religion due to the menace of a powerful foreign force: Kixmi (Christ).

But there's no reference to destruction by earthquakes, volcanoes floods or drought like in other cultures. Not a single one. The only destructive force that appears once and again in myths is Christianity. 

Very wrong. Because the Basque oral tradition does not have any reference to a cataclysm, the world has never experienced one? The world is quite larger than Iberia, you know.



I know. I was just using it to prove that not every single culture has memory of a natural cataclysm, a commonly accepted false notion. Many peoples do but not ALL. And the cataclysm types differ (floods in flood prone areas, drought in drought prone areas, etc.)



Edited by Maju

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: 05-Oct-2005 at 02:48

When Solon had gone to Egypt, the Egyptian priests told him about the terrible earthquakes in Greece and the disaster of the Greek nation which lived in Greece 9,000 years before that time and that the Athenian civilization and culture was much older than the Egyptian one.

The statement implies that the Egyptians had records about the "Greek nation" 9000 years before Solon.  This would mean that Egyptian civilization itself was at least in existence by about 9600 BC.  Egyptian hieroglyphic writing only existed from about 3250 BC - "King Scorpion inscription", and from this time until about 1500 BC concerned itself with immediate neighbors.  Any references to the Aegean (Keftiu, "Crete") and to Europe (Haunebu, "Greece") only date from about 1550 BC and afterward. 

Another problem with this statement is that it is relatively late (Plato) compared to other Greek authors such as Herodotus who had no doubts that Egyptian civilization was older than Greek civilization.  He, too, had spoken with Egyptian priests, but never gained any knowledge of any Atlantis or of some disaster in Greece. 

The third problem with this statement, is that even if it was based on some kernal of truth, but not necessarily as remotely ancient as it is so stated, "Greek nation" could mean just about anything.  From the Egyptian point of view, any people from Greece at such a remote period could be viewed by more recent Egyptian authority as being "Greek", only because they inhabited "Greece", without regard to ethno-linguistic origin.  Despite the fact that the Egyptians knew that the tribal configuration of Nubia kept changing, they kept the name Wawat for the name of the land, and referred to all its inhabitants as Nehasiu

Back to Top
Cywr View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar
Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6003
  Quote Cywr Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Oct-2005 at 03:15
atal Hoyuk is the oldest substantial settlement found in Anatolia, and its not considered a city (insuficient diversification and division of labour), but rather, an exceptionaly large (and thus probably prosperous) farming settlment. Its oldest layers date back as far as 8000 BC, and at its peak had a population of around 10,000. Its often sited as a test case for what is or isn't a city. Numerous similar settlements have been found, most younger, and virtualy all significantly smaller.

Jericho maybe as old as 12,000 years, but it too isn't regarded as a city, but again a large settlment. This is some speculation on what exactly the wall is, its tempting to assume that it was for defence (against presumably other humans), but there are theories suggesting it might have actualy been for defence against floods (i mentioned this in a discussion on the two a while back, i can dig up the source from that book i used on my course if need be, intresting alternative theory none-the-less, and makes as rethink the assumption that a wall muct therefore be for defence against humans).
Arrrgh!!"
Back to Top
Alkiviades View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 01-Sep-2005
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 469
  Quote Alkiviades Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 05-Oct-2005 at 04:32

Originally posted by Maju

I said that because you give no proof of your fancy theories. I meant to be cutting, not exactly insulting.

Cutting? Why, are we having an intimacy here and you consider yourself oblidged to be cutting in your remarks about me?

How much is an "acre" in metric system?  

A tad more than 4000 m2 I think

According to all sources the minimal population for still ill-excavated Los Millares was of 1000 people, but I'm positive it had many more. (http://usuarios.lycos.es/losmillares/ - in Spanish).

Don't dig Spanish, but I take your word on it... so, the several thousands were in reality 1.000? A village, perhaps? And... what do you mean "you" are positive it had more? What are you, some sorts of archeologist with highly esteemed credentials? It's not about your estimations here, is it?

I've never said that such city was older than others. I actually give a quite precise and commonly accepted as prudent date for the start of it: 2600 BCE. This date is also valid for other early Iberian sites like Zambujal (VNSP).

I had seen a "2.800 BC" as starting date... are there varied estimations?

That some of these cities could be linked to the legends of atlantis and Erythia has nothing to do with their antiquity as it is obvious that 9,000 years before Plato there was no city at all in the whole planet (there was no even agriculture!). So the dates given in Plato's narration must be wrong.

So, let's recap this: You are not taking literaly the "9.000 year" mark, but you are taking literaly they "beyond the pillars of Herakles"? Picky, ain't we? And, is Andalucia "beyond the pillars of Herakles"?

 

  I know. I was just using it to prove that not every single culture has memory of a natural cataclysm, a commonly accepted false notion. Many peoples do but not ALL. And the cataclysm types differ (floods in flood prone areas, drought in drought prone areas, etc.)

You [i[know? Yet you speak adamantly about "only christian myths"? You confuse me . Also, I never said ALL people have such traditions, I specifically mentioned people from around the globe having such traditions. What excactly did you fail to comprehend with?

 

Cywr and others

I have been unable to locate any relevant data on the internet but I'll keep trying. I've seen a couple of documentaries about those sites a few years ago and I also read about them in a couple newspapers. But you shouldn't take my word on it, so I'll keep looking until I find some reference. I don't even remember the names of the sites. The Indian one was a rather recent finding and I should get some reference of it sooner or later. Do our Turkish and Iranian friends here have no data about them? One site was in modern Turkey and the other in modern Iran.

Also, the C dating method is not - to my knowledge - used directly to determine the antiquity of buildings and such. Layers, fossils etc. are used. Am I wrong?

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>

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 0.156 seconds.