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  <1 234
Author
maks View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary


Joined: 20-May-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 21
  Quote maks Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Were the Greeks indigenous?
    Posted: 23-Aug-2012 at 17:39
Originally posted by Don Quixote

The gReeks always conneced isdon and special knowledge with North, the land of the Hyperboreans; bt I don't see how that can be any indication to migrations from North; mby be for some real Greeks journeying to there, if the myths are to be taken at face value, but not migrations from there. I don't remember mythological migrations that state that so and so Greek guy came from Hyperborea per se.
 


Don Quixote,

I don't take for granted any Celtic migration at that period. I am just giving some conjectures based on the combination of some factors. Celtic were identified as an ethnos at a period which roughly coincides with the Halshtat culture. Yet the boundary with the Illyrian world remains very thin. Archeologists asserts that "Urnfield Culture" at its nadir was expanded in south. A powerful stream might have tarnished even the Greece as the below map suggest.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UrnfieldCulture.jpg

The carriers of 'Urnfield culture' were Proto-Illyrians, who crept even in Greece. It seem logical to assume that Dorians were a confederation of proto-Illyrian tribes. To sum it up, Celts are derived from the same ethnic pool of Illyrians. One is tempted to say that Roman writers ascribed a 'Celtic' origin to the Greeks because of their incapability to grasp the very fact that only Illyrians were existent at the period when Danubian peoples moved in south.


Originally posted by Don Quixote

Which writer mentioned the last detail and where? Which Greek customs are the same as those of the Celts? Every such custom has to be followed by itself, so the time of possible cultural borrowing to be stipulated; sometimes there are just coincidences too, not every similaity shows borrowing.


This similarity was pointed out by Ephorus. He did not specify what customs were.

Ephorus, about 350 B.C., has three lines of verse about the Celts in which they are described as using" the same customs as the Greeks " - whatever that may mean - and being on the friendliest terms with that people, who established guest friend-ships among them.
  


Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4734
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Aug-2012 at 02:50
Celts are not Illyrians, the developed in Central Europe, way away from Illyria; and Urnfield are not Celts either, those are pre-Celtiic, in this time there were nor Greeks nor Celts per se. Now, if Urnfield brushed with Greece, we can talk about possible pre-historial mixing, not a historical one, as with Celts. Celts are derived probably from Halshtatt, but this happened in what is now Germany, not in Illyria.

File:Celts in Europe.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celts
Here, the yellow is Halstatt, the light green is Celtic expansion by 275 BC, nowhere close to Greece, nor Illyria.

Besides, only one unspecified line by someone doesn't mean much to me. Such things are supposed to be proven by archeological material, not by opinions that may for all we know be wrong. The ancient writers weren't right in all things by any means, so such a reference is not of much worth. Was Ephorus a historian?


Edited by Don Quixote - 24-Aug-2012 at 02:58
Back to Top
TheAlaniDragonRising View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Spam Fighter

Joined: 09-May-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6084
  Quote TheAlaniDragonRising Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Aug-2012 at 07:08
I found one or two reference to do with Celts within the area talked about here, involving Illyians, Dacians, and Thracians:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_warfare#Illyrianshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_warfare#http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celtic_warfare#Thracians

Edited by TheAlaniDragonRising - 24-Aug-2012 at 07:10
What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture.
Back to Top
Mountain Man View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 16-Aug-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 873
  Quote Mountain Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Aug-2012 at 18:37
Technically speaking, with the exception of the original hominids in the Rift Valley, there is no such thing as an "indigenous" people.  Everyone migrated from somewhere.  The Amerinds, for example, are now known to have most likely migrated to America from Asia, either across the Land Bridge or by following the shoreline and edges of the glaciers, and although they may well have been the "first" humans in America, they were not "native" to the area, are equally have driven out earlier groups.  The Ansazi, for example, are referred to as "ancients" by other Amerinds, and have a great deal in common with the Maya in terms of construction, agriculture, road building and astronomy.

Sorry about that, CV.  Cool
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Back to Top
Mountain Man View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 16-Aug-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 873
  Quote Mountain Man Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Aug-2012 at 18:42
Originally posted by Don Quixote

Celts are not Illyrians, the developed in Central Europe, way away from Illyria; and Urnfield are not Celts either, those are pre-Celtiic, in this time there were nor Greeks nor Celts per se. Now, if Urnfield brushed with Greece, we can talk about possible pre-historial mixing, not a historical one, as with Celts. Celts are derived probably from Halshtatt, but this happened in what is now Germany, not in Illyria.

File:Celts in Europe.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celts
Here, the yellow is Halstatt, the light green is Celtic expansion by 275 BC, nowhere close to Greece, nor Illyria.

Besides, only one unspecified line by someone doesn't mean much to me. Such things are supposed to be proven by archeological material, not by opinions that may for all we know be wrong. The ancient writers weren't right in all things by any means, so such a reference is not of much worth. Was Ephorus a historian?


And yet the Celts seem to have come after the Picts, the Picts  having become somewhat legendary by the time the Celts were being mentioned cicrca 400 Ad or so.

The Irish, currently considered by many to be the descendants of the Celts, are more likely to be descendants of the Hyberni, one of the two groups who made up the original Picts, although it appears uncertain just exactly where the Picts themselves came from.


Edited by Mountain Man - 24-Aug-2012 at 18:45
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Back to Top
TheAlaniDragonRising View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Spam Fighter

Joined: 09-May-2011
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6084
  Quote TheAlaniDragonRising Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24-Aug-2012 at 18:44
Originally posted by Mountain Man

Technically speaking, with the exception of the original hominids in the Rift Valley, there is no such thing as an "indigenous" people.  Everyone migrated from somewhere.  The Amerinds, for example, are now known to have most likely migrated to America from Asia, either across the Land Bridge or by following the shoreline and edges of the glaciers, and although they may well have been the "first" humans in America, they were not "native" to the area, are equally have driven out earlier groups.  The Ansazi, for example, are referred to as "ancients" by other Amerinds, and have a great deal in common with the Maya in terms of construction, agriculture, road building and astronomy.

Sorry about that, CV.  Cool
A very good argument against the use of the term race when describing people from different regions.
What a handsome figure of a dragon. No wonder I fall madly in love with the Alani Dragon now, the avatar, it's a gorgeous dragon picture.
Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4734
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25-Aug-2012 at 01:32
Originally posted by Mountain Man

Originally posted by Don Quixote




And yet the Celts seem to have come after the Picts, the Picts  having become somewhat legendary by the time the Celts were being mentioned cicrca 400 Ad or so.

The Irish, currently considered by many to be the descendants of the Celts, are more likely to be descendants of the Hyberni, one of the two groups who made up the original Picts, although it appears uncertain just exactly where the Picts themselves came from.

Sorry, I didn't get here the connection with the Greeks.
Of course people are moving and mixing everywhere, any indigeunouslity is very relevant; when it's said that the Greeks are is "indigenous"what is meant is that the Dorian hypothesis that states that the Dorian Greeks came from the North and assimilated/dsiplaced whoever was there may not be happened so. At least this is my take on it.
Back to Top
TITAN_ View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 21-Jun-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 480
  Quote TITAN_ Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Aug-2012 at 07:00
DNA tests show that the harlogroup of the ancient Greeks is not related to Northern Europe but to Southern & Eastern only. Myths and fantasies are no proof of anything. The so-called "North" that the Dorians (hypothetically) came from, was the North of Greece (Balkan peninsula) not.... Scandinavia!
Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4734
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 27-Aug-2012 at 11:01
That's right, from the Balkans. Which means from places like Macedon, Epirus etc; talking about this I never got that - if, hypothetically, there was a Dorian invasio, then the said places would be populated by the first Dorian/Greeks - how come its said that they weren't such, if those were the first places where the Dorians came to iin Greece?
Back to Top
Diviacus View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 06-Mar-2011
Location: France
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 73
  Quote Diviacus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Aug-2012 at 07:43
Originally posted by Mountain Man

Originally posted by Don Quixote

Celts are not Illyrians, the developed in Central Europe, way away from Illyria; and Urnfield are not Celts either, those are pre-Celtiic, in this time there were nor Greeks nor Celts per se. Now, if Urnfield brushed with Greece, we can talk about possible pre-historial mixing, not a historical one, as with Celts. Celts are derived probably from Halshtatt, but this happened in what is now Germany, not in Illyria.

File:Celts in Europe.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celts
Here, the yellow is Halstatt, the light green is Celtic expansion by 275 BC, nowhere close to Greece, nor Illyria.

Besides, only one unspecified line by someone doesn't mean much to me. Such things are supposed to be proven by archeological material, not by opinions that may for all we know be wrong. The ancient writers weren't right in all things by any means, so such a reference is not of much worth. Was Ephorus a historian?


And yet the Celts seem to have come after the Picts, the Picts  having become somewhat legendary by the time the Celts were being mentioned cicrca 400 Ad or so.

The Irish, currently considered by many to be the descendants of the Celts, are more likely to be descendants of the Hyberni, one of the two groups who made up the original Picts, although it appears uncertain just exactly where the Picts themselves came from.
This map is completely outdated. Extensive studies from the last 15 years have shown that the "Halstatt - La Tene" model is not the right one. (It's not the right  thread to discuss it however.)
Back to Top
medenaywe View Drop Down
AE Moderator
AE Moderator
Avatar
Master of Meanings

Joined: 06-Nov-2010
Location: /
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 17084
  Quote medenaywe Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Aug-2012 at 07:57
Grimm brothers fairy tales are on every channel today people!Regards to all of You...I like the Cinderella indeed!
Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4734
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Aug-2012 at 12:11
Originally posted by Diviacus

Originally posted by Mountain Man

Originally posted by Don Quixote

Celts are not Illyrians, the developed in Central Europe, way away from Illyria; and Urnfield are not Celts either, those are pre-Celtiic, in this time there were nor Greeks nor Celts per se. Now, if Urnfield brushed with Greece, we can talk about possible pre-historial mixing, not a historical one, as with Celts. Celts are derived probably from Halshtatt, but this happened in what is now Germany, not in Illyria.

File:Celts in Europe.png
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celts
Here, the yellow is Halstatt, the light green is Celtic expansion by 275 BC, nowhere close to Greece, nor Illyria.

Besides, only one unspecified line by someone doesn't mean much to me. Such things are supposed to be proven by archeological material, not by opinions that may for all we know be wrong. The ancient writers weren't right in all things by any means, so such a reference is not of much worth. Was Ephorus a historian?


And yet the Celts seem to have come after the Picts, the Picts  having become somewhat legendary by the time the Celts were being mentioned cicrca 400 Ad or so.

The Irish, currently considered by many to be the descendants of the Celts, are more likely to be descendants of the Hyberni, one of the two groups who made up the original Picts, although it appears uncertain just exactly where the Picts themselves came from.
This map is completely outdated. Extensive studies from the last 15 years have shown that the "Halstatt - La Tene" model is not the right one. (It's not the right  thread to discuss it however.)

OK. Post here a better one, with references, etc.
Back to Top
Diviacus View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 06-Mar-2011
Location: France
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 73
  Quote Diviacus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 28-Aug-2012 at 14:47
I don't want to "spoil" this thread. Heareafter the begining of a thread I opened on another forum :

The Hallstatt – La Tène model is definitely out!

 1- The Hallstatt - La Tène model

 

In the early 19th century, historians believed that the Celts had been present in Western Europe since the beginning of the 2nd millennium BCE.

The discovery of the sites of Hallstatt (1846) and La Tène (1857) allowed historians to recognize the presence of Celts, where Herodotus located them in the fifth century BCE, near the mouth of the Danube.

In 1870, the French Gabriel de Mortillet and the Swiss Emile Desor recognized, among the materials discovered in tombs located near the Etruscan town of Marzabotto, fibulae and swords similar to those they had found in the Champagne tombs, and on the Swiss site of La Tène.

 

The historical migrations of the Celts to the North of Italy in the 5th - 4th centuries described by Livy were therefore certified by these discoveries.

Historians of the beginning of the 20th century, including the French J. Déchelette, imagined then that the Celtic world expanded from the fifth century, due to migrations of populations of Latenian culture.

Thus the hypothesis of the origin and expansion of the Celts from a central European core was born.

A little later, the Iron Age was divided in two periods, Hallstatt (-850 to -450) and La Tène (-450 to 0), the second culture obviously deriving from the first one.

The hypothesis that the cultures expand with peoples migrations was then applied to the previous period, and it resulted with the following chronological sequence:

The Tumulus culture ® The Urnfield culture ® The Hallstatt culture ® The La Tène culture.

 

This model was « The model » throughout the 20th century, with some very unfortunate developments (G.Kossinna).

It is yet very common, especially on Internet, to explain the origin and expansion of the Celts, as it is clear and simple.

 

To sum up this model:

- The Celts appear at the beginning of the 1st millennium with the Hallstatt culture,

- The expansion of the Celts is due to migrations from this Central European core.

 A map example:

 (the same as shown before)

 

This model is simple but it is wrong.

At least that’s what all the scholars have been writing for the last ten years.

 

2- Why has the Hallstatt – La Tène model been abandoned?

 

Here is a list of some of the present scholars that have clearly abandoned the Hallstatt – La Tène (HLT) model:

 

Miklos SZABO (2009)

Sabine RIECKHOFF (2006):    

It is astounding to see that the J.Dechelette hypothesis remains to the present day the main base of all maps, on which the Celts expand in all the directions from a so-called original land.

Stephen OPPENHEIMER (2010):

The current orthodox view of the origin of the Celts is one of the remaining myths left over from the 19th century.

Ludwig PAULI

Daniele VITALI (2006): 

The migrationist models that have been in use to solve the Celts presence in Iberia have been abandoned.

John KOCH (2009)

John COLIS (2003):

So why did the Celts have to arrive sometime in the Iron Age? Part of this was due to the concept of the so-called Hallstatt and La Tène cultures, and in 1986 I brought together examples in my paper “Adieu La Tene” and “Adieu Hallstatt” showing how at various times and places the archaeological record had been grossly misinterpreted to fit the preconceived interpretation.

Brian RAFTERY

Barry CUNLIFFE (2010):

A traditional belief, still widely held, is that the Celts originated somewhere in western central Europe, to the north of the Alps, and from there, in a succession of movements over many centuries, spread westwards into Iberia, Britain, ….The time is now right for a new model of “Celtic origins” to be offered.

Patrice BRUN (2005)

Pierre Yves MILCENT (2006):  

The latenian core and the hypothesis of a cultural or ethnic centrifuge model have never existed, if not in the mind of many searchers since the 19th century.

Venceslas KRUTA (2006):                

The initial core of the Celts was up to the present day identified as the Hallstatt culture. We must fundamentally change our ideas on the origin and expansion of the Celts.

Matthieu POUX (2010)

Back to Top
Don Quixote View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar

Retired AE Moderator

Joined: 29-Dec-2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4734
  Quote Don Quixote Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Aug-2012 at 14:38
Thanks for the info. However, I didn't see where in your post is said that the Celts went all the way to Greece - all I see iis North Italy. Can you post a map here, which illustrate your info? If the thread is spoilt by such an action, I will willingly take a responsibility for it.
Back to Top
Diviacus View Drop Down
Knight
Knight


Joined: 06-Mar-2011
Location: France
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 73
  Quote Diviacus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 30-Aug-2012 at 00:38
I actually didn't say that the Celts went all the way to Greece (in remote times), because they didn't Smile.
My point is not relating to possible movements of Celts into Greece, it's relating to the ancient model described in some previous posts, assuming that:
1- the Celts "came" from the Urnfield Culture to the Hallstatt core,
2- the Hallsttat culture evolved into the Latenian culture,
3- then the Celts moved from this latenian core to the West, to the South and to the East.
 
Today, the status of the knowledge is that :
- The point 1- is wrong
- The point 2- is true
- The point 3- is partly true / wrong. What is wrong are the expansions to the west and to the south. What is true is the expansion to the East, from the 3rd century BC.
So I agree with you that the Celts cannot be considered as part of the origin of the Greeks. They went all the way to Greece only in the 3rd century.
And that's why I say my comment is off topic Smile.
Back to Top
Alcebiades View Drop Down
Housecarl
Housecarl

suspended

Joined: 20-Mar-2012
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 38
  Quote Alcebiades Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Sep-2012 at 10:13
If you want to be technical, all humans are indigenous to Ethiopia.
Back to Top
chicagogeorge View Drop Down
Shogun
Shogun


Joined: 05-Feb-2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 207
  Quote chicagogeorge Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23-Oct-2012 at 19:07
Recent work suggest that Indo-European languages originated in Anatolia and not further north in Eurasian Steppes as suggested by Gimbutas.


Family Tree of Languages Has Roots in Anatolia, Biologists Say


The computer was also given geographical information about the present range of each language and told to work out the likeliest pathways of distribution from an origin, given the probable family tree of descent. The calculation pointed to Anatolia, particularly a lozenge-shaped area in what is now southern Turkey, as the most plausible origin — a region that had also been proposed as the origin of Indo-European by the archaeologist Colin Renfrew, in 1987, because it was the source from which agriculture spread to Europe.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/24/science/indo-european-languages-originated-in-anatolia-analysis-suggests.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Renfrew had already hypothesized this idea 25 years ago, when he suggested that the Greek language developed in the Aegean region over a long period of time beginning during the late neolithic era

http://www.webofstories.com/play/18221






Edited by chicagogeorge - 23-Oct-2012 at 19:13
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 234

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 0.063 seconds.