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 - http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=5730& ;PN=6

(3) The "palace" and citadel of Gla were destroyed by fire. Recent excavations at the site by Iakovides have confirmed that this destruction occurred early in the LH IIIB period (1300-1190 BC), at which time the Copaïc Basin may well have been reflooded.

(4) There are some grounds for believing that part, if not all, of the later or so-called "New" Palace at Thebes was destroyed at this time, although not by fire.

(1) The fortifications at Mycenae were strengthened and an underground water supply system was added, presumably to allow the defenders to withstand a protracted siege (Phases 2 and 3 in the evolution of the citadel at Mycenae).

(2) The fortifications at Tiryns were strengthened, the citadel was substantially enlarged by the addition of the Unterburg (Lower Citadel), the storage facilities within the fortified area were enormously expanded with the construction of the East and South Galleries, in addition to numerous vaulted chambers within the thickness of the Unterburg's fortification wall, and an underground water supply system was again added in a final stage of construction to give the fortress adequate resources in the case of a prolonged siege (Phases 2 and 3 in the evolution of the citadel at Tiryns).

(3) Cyclopean fortifications were constructed around the Acropolis in Athens, and in a late stage of the LH IIIB period a subterranean water supply system was added to this citadel as well.

(4) A massive program of fortification was initiated at the Isthmus of Corinth in the form of a wall which was evidently intended to seal off the Peloponnese from invasion by land forces from the north. The surviving evidence suggests that this enormously ambitious project was never completed.

Your thread is the Dorian Invasion or when happened  the collapse of Mycenaean civilization ?

Dorian Invasion happened in the Geometric Period when the Mycenaen collapse done in the late bronge age according the archaelogical evidence.The collapse of Mycenaean civilization was not an isolated occurrence.

Thanks Maju, now I get the picture

Can you tell  me  please where all these mentioned(bold) ?

As about the period that you mention The Late Helladic III (1400-1150 B.c.) or full Mycenaean Late Bronze Age] shows cultural unity at an urban economic level, some sort of "Achaean" political confederacy, and enough enterprise to take over Minoan relations with Egypt and to expand to Sicily, Macedonia, Rhodes, and Cyprus after the destruction of Knossos and other great Minoan cities about 1400. Patriarchal or proto-feudal government and shift in.religious emphasis suggested in Homer for the slow end of the period seem undeveloped compared to palace archives, urban economy, spatial cultural unity, great numbers of collective chamber-tombs to house the dead of an increased population, and improved farming methods (irrigation, etc.).

Natural disasters can destroy entire cities and decimate the population, but they cannot destroy entire civilisations on their own. No matter of the magnitude, there will still be people left behind, and they eventually will rebuild, maybe in smaller scale, but highly similar to that which had been destroyed. Only if the destruction is followed by an enemy invasion, will the civilization be changed.

Maljkovic  the collapses  of the Cretan and the Cycleadan Civilizations are the great examples of natural disaster

Maju Knossos felt bacause of Tsunami, that propably created after of an earthquake. And I will open a thread reagarding the Cycladean civilization

Just one or two notes on the above mentioned.

1) Greek 'tribes' were obviously a part of the Sea People. The 'Danuna' are identified as the 'Danaoi', most consider the 'Ekwesh' to be the 'Acheans' due to a similar to a Hittite term used to describe them. There are also several Egyptian and Hebrew texts that refer to the 'Peleshet' comming from 'Caphor' that has been identified as Crete.
In addition we could note several archeologic finds such as pottery, buildings and place names that are very similar if not identical to Greek of that era.

2) The only area that has been recorded to have been affected by the Minoan-Athenea war was these two areas. This ended with a result the 'surrender' of Athens that was struck by plague and the agreement of sending 14 youths (half male half female) every nine year to be sacrificed to the Minotaur. While this is obviously a symbolization for something else, I really can't say what. (unless we believe that the beast did exist)

3)The conception of a Dorian invasion is an outdated theory. Besides archeologic finds that can link their presence prior to the theorized invasion or arrival.
For example:
Dispite the unexplainable insistance of refering to an introduction of a new type of sword and of the fibula (an early form of the safety-pin) by the invaders (either foreign or domestic), both are found in Mycenean contexts before any of the theorized disasters . Changes in customs which did occured after 1200 B.C.:
the use of iron, cremation rather than inhumation, and single or double burials in  stone-lined graves (cists) instead of multiple burials in chamber tombs, all these took place gradually and do not seem to be related to one another (Hooker 1976)

It should also be mentioned that there are also written records, Homer clearly mentions Dorians in his Iliad. book 2.654 and 665 or we could look into the Doric linguistic elements found in Linear B' tablets as Prof. Chantzidakis has noted that clearly indicate their presence.

Significant Destructions

(1) The so-called "houses outside the walls" at Mycenae (House of the Oil Merchant, House of Shields, House of Sphinxes, West House), located on a series of terraces south of Grave Circle B, were destroyed by fire in LH IIIB1. Wace concluded, from the evidence of stirrup jars filled with oil whose necks had been smashed off, that the fire was purposefully set after oil had been poured over the basement of the House of the Oil Merchant.

(2) The so-called "Potter's Shop" at Zygouries, probably a country mansion or even a small palace, was destroyed by fire in the LH IIIB1 period.

(3) The "palace" and citadel of Gla were destroyed by fire. Recent excavations at the site by Iakovides have confirmed that this destruction occurred early in the LH IIIB period, at which time the Copaïc Basin may well have been reflooded.

(4) There are some grounds for believing that part, if not all, of the later or so-called "New" Palace at Thebes was destroyed at this time, although not by fire.

Key word: being built. Defending a fortress that is not completed is pointless, stupid and borderline suicidal. It would make far more sense to abandon it and fall back to a fort that was completed. Besides, there are three ways to hit Corinth-North, Sea and South. If indeed the enemy crossed the strait of Rio, they would have open access through the southern route, just like Atila the Hun did.

Speaking of Atila, did you know that besides writen evidence, there is basically no archeological remains of the Huns left, in spite of the fact that they were responsible for the fall of an empire? This could be the case here, an attack of an unknown nomadic tribe destroys the Acheans, but leaves no evidence, and then the Dorians come, like Germanic and Slavic tribes did, and settle in the remanents of the lost civilization?

• Andronikos (1954) - a peasant revolution. /Criticism: hardly believable/
  
• Vermeule (1960) and Iakovides (1974) - economic crisis caused by Sea Peoples's piracy (disruption of trade). /Cause of ultimate destructon unclear/
  
• Desborough (1964) - invasion by land from the North.
• Mylonas (1966) - separate reasons for each destrution (some of them traceable via the Greek sagas). /Criticism: there is contemporaneity in the destruction/
• Carpenter (1966) - massive drought. /It may have some base but doesn't adress the main problem of the destruction/
• Many authors (1975-96) - invaders (based in the appearence of a "coarse pottery") from (ultimately) the Central Danube basin (Urnfields?) /Criticism: the role an interpretation of this ware is unclear and it goes with Myceneans to Cyprus and elsewhere/
• Winter (1977) - Barbarian invaders don't need to leave significative remains out of destruction, as the study of historical invasions of the Galatians and Slavs show.
  
• Betancourt (1976) - Very specialized and therfore fragile Mycenean economy.
  
• Drews (1993) - Substantial changes in warfare style (aristocratic chariot -> plebeian javelin) weakened the monarchical state to the point of destruction in some cases. /Criticism: chariots were surely never important in mountainous Greece/
  

I can't help but notice that you contradicted your statement.
Originally saying :

"The wall at the Isthmus was abandoned, after the sacking of Corinth. The enemy could not come from the north because their was a giant wall being built blocking off the isthmus, and, moreover, there is no evidence that there was a struggle near the wall."

you read the source correctly to post :

"The surviving evidence suggests that this enormously ambitious project was never completed."

Even though we have no way of proving the first, the second obviously contradicts your originally thesis of this 'feat' being impossible. So actually, the very notion of a Northern invasion very well may have happened.

Now this I can actually see some possibility in having happend. The reason for the sack of Troy obviously wasn't Helen, nor some Kings wounded pride for being deceived by his wife.

This totally is wrong.
The tablets also known as 'O-KA tablets' mention nothing related to invasions nor preparations. These tablets simply indicate that there was a 'high ranking officer' (there are also suggestions of of a translation as 'rower') with troops stationed on the shores of Messinia.
So the invasion theories, either Doric or other were connected to these tablets by archeologists that literally jumped to the conclusion that there was a preparation. But this in reality could be nothing more than an everyday event.There is also Hooker's theory that has suggested that these tablets are related to agricultural endeavor.

What does 'is Cretan' mean, we are discussing Sea Peoples which are estimated to have appeared and 'invaded' approximately 1200.
So based on archeologic finds we know that Crete at that time had already been conquered by the Myceneans since 1450. So the Peleshet obviously were Greek.

Not that this 'theory' fits the timeline that should be follwed since Minos, based on the date given to his palace ruled sometime around 1600, but who ruled Italy ?

Iliad 2.654

" Ôëçðïëåìïò ä' 'Çñáêëåéäçò çõò"
(Tlepolemus, son of Heracles)

Just a suggestion.
Don't you think that there sould be some credit given to 'darthmouth.edu' after all that copy/paste ??

First I never mentioned invasion, I clearly mentioned its an outdated theory which does indicate that I don't agree with it. So half your post if directed towards me is an obvious misunderstanding.

Theseus NEVER attacked Crete. I insist you read Apollodorus who is obviously far more qualified than either of us on the exact presentation of the myths.

I managed to find a summary of the text as presented by Perseus.tufts.

"THESEUS. Book III., Chap. XVI., Epitome, I.1-24.

On growing up Theseus quits Troezen for Athens, kills Periphetes, Sinis, 3.16.1., the Crommyonian sow, Sciron, Cercyon and Damactes, Epitome,1-4. Aegeus, instigated by Medea, sends Theseus against the Marathonian bull and offers him a cup of poison, 5-6. Theseus, with the help of Ariadne, conquers the Minotaur, and flying with Ariadne resigns her to Dionysus in Naxos, 7-9, and on the death of Aegeus succeeds to the kingdom of Athens, 10-11. Daedalus and his son Icarus escape from the labyrinth: Icarus falls into the sea, but Daedalus reaches the court of Cocalus, whose daughters kill Minos, 12-15. Theseus marries an Amazon, and afterwards Phaedra. Death of Hippolytus. 16-19. Ixion and his wheel, 20. Battle of the Centaurs and Lapiths, 21. (Zenobius). Caeneus, 22. Theseus goes down to hell with Pirithous, but is freed by Hercules, and being expelled from Athens is murdered by Lyomedes, 23-24."

I do believe Apollodorus would mention the event had it took place.

As for the Ahhiyawa do read what J.D. Hawkins has to say :

"The scattered references to it suggested that it lay across the sea and that its interests often conflicted with those of the Hittites. What is now known of the geography of western Anatolia makes it clear that there could be no room on the mainland for the kingdom of Ahhiyawa. Furthermore, the references to the political interests of Ahhiyawa on the west coast mesh well with increasing archaeological evidence for Mycenaean Greeks in the area, so that it is now widely accepted that "Ahhiyawa" is indeed the Hittite designation for this culture."

http://www.archaeology.org/0405/etc/troy3.html - http://www.archaeology.org/0405/etc/troy3.html

What you say about the Herakleide myth is a mere speculation. Archology has proven to us that these myths, considered as fairy-tales by some do provide significant information of actual events. For example, there is the Romus, Romulus myth that was recently proven to hold alot of truth, we know that the Iliad was real, so was the story of the Argonauts. Why totally discredit this myth and based on what facts ?

As for the O-KA tablets, they mention guarding yes, but not related to a definite invasion which is why I said that this may have very well been an everyday event. I do believe every city state took some kind of measures of precaution against a probable attack from neighbors or foreigners that they traded with..

If there are two sides in a war, one will be the winner, the other will lose. One will survive no matter what. Same goes for any number of sides, if all Achean city-states fought among themselves, one of them had to win over the others. The only way for all to lose was an intervention of a foreign power, and I don't believe the Sea People were that power.

The wall of Corinth makes even less sense now. Corinth had many neighbours to the South, like Mycenae, Sparta, Tyrinth etc. But to the North there was only Athens. If the war was among Achean city-states, it would make far better logic for Corinthians to build a wall to the South, since the threat was greater from that side.  

Even so, building a wall that seals off a whole peninsula is a very expensive enterprise. And for what? To protect them from Athens?  

From the look of things, it was Athens who need to seal itself off from the rest of the Peloponesean powers who outnumbered her by far.

Maju, that is exactly what I am talking about. The only question is who that power was.

Didn't you ask where he mentions them and did I not post exactly where ?
Besides, what were the Herakleides if not the sons of Herakles that believed their ancestor was deprived of his rights to the throne returned to obtain what was rightfully theirs?
Homer also mentions in Iliad 3.27 :

"for that the other sons and grandsons of mighty Heracles threatened him."
He clearly mentions "sons and gradsons" why are they not part of the Herakleides?

My theory. To be honest I don't have one but this is what I've come to believe on the various theories presented.

I'm sure that the Dorians were 100% Greek and the theory of their invasions has a couple of flaws. But there is an undoubtable alteration in the ruling class of Peloponessos. While we can find Dorian liguistic elements in the Linear B' tablets, the language does become alot more simplifed. But since this takes place 2-3 centuries later, it could be nothing more than simple evolution.

On the Sea People invasion, it is quite interesting that all the areas that were part of the SP. obviously had some kind of connection to Myceneans, either by trade or colonies. Drower for example tells us that while these people are theorized to be connected with Hittites (some have mentioned Canaanite, Nubians see A.Nibbi) these people wear a distinctive type of clothing in all  the depictions of them, their ships and armor is something totally unrelated to the above. The major flaw in this theory is, while they were powerfull enough, to raid and destroy the Myceneans (a look at Mycene and Tyrinth indicate the need of huge power) and allegedly destroy the Hittites, (dispite the total lack of any archeologic finds to indicate foreign presence either in Greece or as deep as the Hittite capital 'Hattushash') they stumbled on Ramsses III that defeated them with ease, even though we have no indication of Egypt bearing such power. Besides there are several Hittite and Amenhotep III records that indicate alliance with these people prior to any destruction.

If you want a theory, I'd look into internal revolts and continuous change of hands on the thrones.
Thucydides tells us that 1.12:

"Even after the Trojan war Hellas was still engaged in removing and settling, and thus could not attain to the quiet which must precede growth. The late return of the Hellenes from Ilium caused many revolutions, and factions ensued almost everywhere; and it was the citizens thus driven into exile who founded the cities."

We know of the 7 against Thebes, the Atheneans attacking Eleusis, the Dorian return and after all this, the Myceneans return from Troy to see someone else having claimed their throne. This may have lead to yet another war and even more problems.
Of course there is a slight problem in the timeline but it just could be possible.

Sorry hadn't read it before but now that I did, one or two questions.

How do you explain the lack of destructed 'sites' in Thessaly and Macedonia. They must have past through there or are you suggesting a different route ? But then again, the question that comes to mind is, why conquer an area destroy everything in site and abandon it?

There is also a total lack in archeologic finds that would indicate a 'foreign' origin, not to mention that according to anthropologic finds, there was never any kind of 'drastic' differentiation in anthropologic racial types that could indicate some foreign 'invaders' or settlers.

(if someone could tell me how to cut and upload a pic from a pdf file, I could put up a table from J. Lawrence Angel's "Social Biology of Greek Culture Growth")

1. Myths regarding a militaristic arrival of the sons of Heracles, presumably the Dorians.
2. The introduction of new cultural elements, including cremations, different swords, iron, and different styles of pottery, into Mycenaean civilization.
3. The collapse of Mycenaean civilization due to warfare.

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". 

Your statement of the SP never fighting a land battle brings up a major flaw in this theory. Mycenae, Pylos, Argos, Corinth etc are far from being considered next to the sea. The only citadel that can be placed in this category is Tyrinth. Besides, this would need an emense amount of power. If we take Thucydides account of the sack of Troy, he mentions some 85 people in each ship (the rowers would obviously be considered as fighting power). A simple comparison of the power needed to sack only 1 city during a timline of some 10 years (if we consider Homer's account accurate) indicates at least 10-20 times more power would be needed to sack all these cities, since they all fell almost simultaniously.

I never said they sacked everything, I actually doubt they sacked more then one city in the Peloponese, if that much. What I am trying to say is they were never a really big military power, like some people are trying to suggest. They might have had a tribal organisation, but never statehood.

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. 

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 javascript:popup%28popup12%29 - 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.

 

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