Illyria

[Taranis]

Welcome to Eupedia, Skylax. I would advise you to post in English, please, since most people who are on this board cannot speak or read Greek.

[Skylax79]

Οι Δωριείς ήταν ελληνικότατο φύλο. Σε αυτό δε χωρά καμμία αμφιβολία. Μάλιστα στις πρώιμες εποχές της Λακεδαίμονας κατά τη περίοδο των μεσσηνιακών πολέμων οι Σπαρτιάτες Βασιλιάδες προσπαθούσαν να ταυτίσουν τις ρίζες τους με τους Αχαιούς βασιλιάδες. Το ότι έιχαν κάποια δειναρική επίδραση (υλλιρική) διαφαίνεται στο οτι τους νεκρούς τους τους καίγανε (κάτι που δε κάνανε οι υπόλοιποι Έλληνες) η παρουσίαζαν στα αγαλματά τους πρόσωπα με μύτη γριπή. Αυτό όμως έγινε την περίοδο που άρχισε να υπάρχει μια πληθυσμιακή σύμπντιξη όταν οι μεσογειακές φυλές του βορρά που εγκαταστάθηκαν στην Πίνδο άρχισαν να μετακινούνται νοτιότερα και μιλάμε γύρω στα 1500 π.Χ. Δε μπορούμε όμως να πούμε οτι η Δωριείς ήταν κατά βάση φυλή Υλλιρική. Κάθε άλλο. Οι μεσογειακές φυλές ε΄χαν απλωθεί τόσο πολύ στον ευρωπαικό χώρο όπου ακόμη και σήμερα βλέπουμε οτι αυτοί οι αρχαίοι μας πρόγονοι άφησαν ισχυρά στίγματα στους υπόλοιπους ευρωπαικούς λαούς. Οι Υλλιριοί ήταν ένας ασήμαντος λαός χωρίς γραφή και ιδιαίτερα πολιτισμικά ευρύματα όπου εμφανίζονται συνήθως σαν βάρβαρος και ληστής. Ο μόνος βασιλιάς που αναφέρεται σαν καθ' όλα Υλλιριός ήταν ο Βαρδύλις όπου και για ένα διάστημα πολύ μικρό βασίλεψε τη Μακεδονία.

[MOESAN]

Are you the idiot who thinks E-V13 is an indigenous European haplogroup?

Are you serious? Do you know that it's an African branch. That every person with an E-V13 haplogroup had a pure black African ancestor? This is fact. There's no, maybe our ancestor was Neanderthal or some other hominid, your ancestor was black from Africa.

Europe was colonized way before E-V13 even came to existence. You were still in Africa singing your tribal songs and doing tribal dances, without any weapons or shelter. You probably lived as nomads because you weren't smart enough to build shelter.

Now shut your stupid mouth and come back to reality.

Europe was colonized way before E-V13 arrived.

Are you so dumb that you can't see this?

late answer
sorry, but your way of adressing to somebody seams to me a naughty child's one, even if I am not the victim - you can express your disaccord in a more respectable way, I think -
and what is this contempt about some peoples and ways of life ?
E1b-V13 is surely in Europe for a long time, even if I can not assign it a precise date (maybe Mesololithic: some Grimaldoids? no sure but?) and the regions of Europe where Y-E1b bearers OF ALL SORTS are found do not show to evident negroid features, for I know: some remnants perhaps, but very very tiny - do not forget N-E Africans was very far from an achieved negroid type, and that somehow ALL OUR ANCESTORS or the bulk of them came from Africa - and it is proved that there have been some "go & return" between N-Africa and Eurasia, and old enough for someones of them! (Y-DNA and mt DNA)
even in the so called South-saharian autosomals I believe there are ones of eurasian origin

[Eldritch]

E-V13 is probably oldest in Europe than both R1a and R1b.
Probably a proto-caucasoid HG.

[Skylax79]

Aristotle for Epirotes
"The deluge in the time of Deucalion, for instance, took place chiefly in the Greek world and in it especially about ancient Hellas, the country about Dodona and the Achelous, a river which has often changed its course. Here the Selli dwelt and those who were formerly called Graeci and now Hellenes.".This is in agreement with Herodotus who states that Dodona was "in Hellas", but this does not mean that all Epirus was in Hellas. Strabo is also in agreement in stating that among lands which were "indisputably Greece" included "parts above Acarnania and Aetolia". (Book 7.7)


​Greek origin of ancient Epirotes by William Mitford

---

Epirus, though mostly held by people of Grecian speech and lineage, had an intermixture of those called barbarians; Illyrians, and perhaps others. Herodotus however, among earliest, and Plutarch, among late ancient historians, clearly reckon the Molossians a Grecian people. Some expressions of Thucydides and Strabo may perhaps be construed either way. But, as it has been formerly observed, Herodotus, Thucydides, and Strabo concur in showing that all Greece was of mixed population; and how the distinction of Greek and barbarian, unknown to Homer, arose, and what at last it was, always remained uncertain. Strabo however, clearly acknowledging the Macedonian for a Greek nation, assures us that the general language of the Epirots was the Macedonian dialect of the Greek; that where another language, probably the Illyric, was in use, the people commonly spoke both, and that, in habits and manners, most of the Epirots hardly differed from the Macedonians.

The governments of the Epirotan states were, some Republican with annual chief magistrates, as at Athens, Thebes, and Rome; others monarchal. That of Molossis, from earliest tradition, was monarchal; and whether the people may have been more or less allowed the always questionable dignity of pure Grecian blood, yet the claim of the royal family to the oldest and noblest Grecian origin, resting on tradition, but asserted by Straho and Plutarch, with Aristotle’s assent implied, is not found anywhere controverted. They reckoned themselves direct descendants ofNeoptolemus Pyrrhus, son of Achilles; who, it was said, ‘” after the Trojan war, migrating from Thessaly, became king of Molossis, Whatever credit may be due to this lofty pretension, that the Molossian sceptre remained in one Greek family, from times beyond certain history till after Aristotle’s age, appears satisfactorily testified.

By advantage of situation and constitution, exempt from great troubles, Molossis, had it had historians, probably afforded little for general interest. Nevertheless we learn from the father of Grecian history that, some generations before his time, it was esteemed respectable among Grecian states. The tale wherein this appears, like many of that writer, somewhat of a romantic cast, nevertheless may have been true in all its parts; and for the information it affords of an important change of manners and policy among the Greeks, and of the florishing condition of several republics about the age of the Athenian legislator Solon, some destroyed before the historian wrote, others little heard of since, while Molossis apparently remained unshaken, it maybe reckoned of considerable historical value.

Clisthenes, tyrant of Sicyon, under whose rule that little state was eminent among those of Peloponnesus,’ desiring, the historian says, to marry his daughter to a man of the greatest consideration and highest worth of all Greece, opened his house for any who, from personal dignity and the eminence of their countries, might have pretensions; that so he might have oppor¬tunity to estimate their merits. Thirteen guests, rivals for his favor, are thus described. There came from the Greek colonies in Italy, then florishing extraordinarily, Smindyrides of Sybaris and Damas of Siris. The former was remarked for going beyond all of his time in the luxury for which Sybaris was renowned. Damas was son of that Samyris who was distinguished by the epithet of the Wise. Am-phimnestus came from Epidamnus, on the coast of the Ionian gulf. Males was of Aetolia, brother of Titormus, esteemed the strongest man in Greece, but who had withdrawn from the society of men to reside in the farthest part of Aetolia.3 Leocedes was son of Phi don, tyrant of Argos; that Phidon, says the historian, who established uniformity of weights and measures throughout Peloponnesus, and, together with his power, (so far, it may seem, bene¬ficially exerted,) was remarked for an arrogance unequalled among the Greeks; for, depriving the Eleans of the presidency of the Olympian festival, he assumed it himself. Two came from Arcadia, Amiantus of Trapezus, and Laphanes of Paros. The father of the latter, Euphorion, was celebrated for his extensive. hospitality, and had the extraordinary fame of having entertained the gods Castor and Pollux. Lysanias came from Eretria in Euboea, then greatly florishing; Onomastus from Elea: Megacles and Hippoclides were of Athens; the latter esteemed the richest Athenian of his time, and the handsomest: Diactondes was of Cranon and Scopada? in Thessaly; Alcon was of Molossis. This simple description of Alcon, combined with what has preceded, enough marks that the Molossians were esteemed a Grecian people, and Molossis then considerable among the Grecian states. One of the Athenians, Megacles, was the successful suitor.

“The history of Greece”, by lord Redesdale By William Mitford

[Skylax79]

"The deluge in the time of Deucalion, for instance, took place chiefly in the Greek world and in it especially about ancient Hellas, the country about Dodona and the Achelous,a river which has often changed its course. Here the Selli dwelt and those who were formerly called Graeci and now Hellenes.".This is in agreement with Herodotus who states that Dodona was "in Hellas", but this does not mean that all Epirus was in Hellas. Strabo is also in agreement in stating that among lands which were "indisputably Greece" included "parts above Acarnania and Aetolia". (Book 7.7.1)

[Skylax79]

​

“Speakers of these various Greek dialects settled different parts of Greece at differenttimes during the Middle Bronze Age,
with one group, the “northwest” Greeks,developing their own dialect and peopling central Epirus. This was the origin of the Molossian or Epirotic tribes
.”E.N.Borza “In the shadow of Olympus; The emergence of Macedon” (revisededition, 1992), page 62the
western greek people (with affinities to the Epirotic tribes) in Orestis, Lyncus,and parts of Pelagonia
;“In the shadow of Olympus..” By Eugene Borza, page 74“We have seen that the “Makedones” or “highlanders” of mountainous westernMacedonia may have been derived from northwest Greek stock. That is, northwestGreece provided a pool of Indo-European speakers of proto-Greek from whichemerged the tribes who were later known by different names as they established theirregional identities in separate parts of the country. Thus the Macedonians may havebeen related to those peoples who at an earlier time migrated south to become thehistorical Dorians, and to other Pindus tribes who were the ancestors of the Epirotesor Molossians.
If it were known that Macedonian was a proper dialect of Greek,like the dialects spoken by Dorians and Molossians
, we would be on much firmerground in this hypothesis.”E.N.Borza “In the shadow of Olympus; The emergence of Macedon” (revised edition,1992), page 78“When Amyntas became king of the Macedonians sometime during the latter third of the sixth century, he controlled a territory that included the central Macedonian plainand its peripheral foothills, the Pierian coastal plain beneath Mt. Olympus, andperhaps the fertile, mountain-encircled plain of Almopia. To the south lay the Greeks

[Skylax79]

Albanian Propaganda from Illyrian.org

Quote:

Epirus-Cameria and Phyrros ,but how come that Romans didn't identify Epirots as Greeks? Why Greek historians tend to hellenize everything? The region of Epirus by most of the facts that ancient historians have given to us seems to be a non Greek region:

Our friend mentions Roman historians and attempts to accuse the Hellenic scholars of Hellenizing everything but he conveniently neglects to present a single quote by a Roman that would suggest otherwise, instead he distorts and due to ignorance jumps to conclusions that would suit his propaganda objective.

Quote:

1)”Thucydides” In his book (Peloponnesian War) He describes the Barbarian Allies of the Peloponnesians.............

True, Thucydides classifies the Chaones and Thesprotoi as 'barbarians' but as Charles Anthon in his 'System of Ancient and Medieval Geography' clarifies, Illyrian irruptions had partly barbarized (obviously culturally) the region hence why we see the difference between the account of Thucydides to the earlier one of Herodotus. A Herodotus, who not only titles Thesprotia as a Hellenic land, but also suggests that the Thessalians (a purely Hellenic people) "came from Thesprotia to dwell in the Aeolian land," book 7.176.4, which indicates that the people were also considered as such.


Quote:

2)"Skylaks" He writes around (370-360 b.c) A Geographic book. He describes the People that lives in Adriatic and Ionian region. "In The North Adriatic lives the tribe of the Liburnians, "The middle and the South Adriatic sea Is Populated By Illyrians" "The Ionian sea is devided Between Chaones and Thesprotes. between them The Mollosians have opened an exit to the sea which is (40 stadia = 8Km).""After Mollosia it comes Ambracia an Hellenic Polis, which is (80 stadia) away from the sea"

Scylax wrote his Periplous, but it has little to do with the claims made. Since he clearly differentiates the above mentioned tribes from the Illyrians:

Quote:

Europe 1.28 ΧΑΟΝΕΣ. Μετὰ δὲ Ἰλλυριοὺς Χάονες. Ἡ δὲ Χαονία ἐστὶν εὐλίμενος· οἰκοῦσι δὲ κατὰ κώμας οἱ Χάονες. Παράπλους δ' ἐστὶ Χαονίας ἥμισυ ἡμέρας. translation CHAONES. AFTER the Illyrians, Chaonians. Chaonia has good harbours: the Chaonians live in villages. And the coastal voyage of Chaonia is a half of a day

Besides the fact that the Chaones and those after them while moving Southward are desribed as a distinct people non-related to the Illyrians, its obvious that the previously noted Illyrian irruptions had played a major role on how they were perceived. This is evident from the fact that although the
Thesprotoi which are as mentioned in Herodotus to be Hellenic and the clear reference to the River Acheron, which is related to Hellenic culture, traditions and mythology is made, Scylax stressed that they, the Chaones, the Kassopians and the Molossoi all lived in villages (κατὰ κώμας) unlike the Ambrakians which lived in a city.
Of course neither can the reference to ἔθνος (nation) be used as an argument, since not only are the Magnesians titled as such, but even the Acheans, which indicates that this isn't an ethnic reference but rather a tribal one.

Quote:

3)Plutarch-----------(Pyrrhus)------------ He was raised as an Illyrian Prince: The Brotherhood between him and Glaucias sons:

Since when are relations between kingdoms which in this case are neighboring considered an indication of descent
This reminds me of our friend Megalommatis' argument that the Myceneans weren't Hellenic because they had paid a visit to the Hittite king.

Plutarch clarifies his linage and gives us info on why the Epirotes, although Hellenic in origin were perceived as a 'backward':
Quote:

The Life of Pyrrhus 1 χρόνῳ δ' ὕστερον Νεοπτόλεμος ὁ Ἀχιλλέως λαὸν ἀγαγὼν αὐτός τε τὴν χώραν κατέσχε, καὶ διαδοχὴν βασιλέων ἀφ' αὑτοῦ κατέλιπε,Πυρρίδας ἐπικαλουμένους· καὶ γὰρ αὐτῷ Πύρρος ἦν παιδικὸν ἐπωνύμιον, καὶ τῶν γνησίων παίδων ἐκ Λανάςσης τῆς Κλεοδαίου τοῦ Ὕλλου γενομένων ἕνα Πύρρον ὠνόμασεν. ἐκ τούτου δὲ καὶ Ἀχιλλεὺς ἐν Ἠπείρῳ τιμὰς ἰσοθέους ἔσχεν, Ἄσπετος ἐπιχωρίῳ φωνῇ προσαγορευόμενος. μετὰ δὲ τοὺς πρώτους τῶν διὰ μέσου βασιλέων ἐκβαρβαρωθέντων καὶ γενομένων τῇ τε δυνάμει καὶ τοῖς βίοις ἀμαυροτέρων, Θαρρύπαν πρῶτον ἱστοροῦσιν Ἑλληνικοῖς ἔθεσι καὶ γράμμασι καὶ νόμοις φιλανθρώποις διακοσμήσαντα τὰς πόλεις ὀνομαστὸν γενέσθαι. translation In after time, however, Neoptolemus the son of Achilles, bringing a people with him, got possession of the country for himself, and left a line of kings descending from him. These were called after him Pyrrhidae; for he had the surname of Pyrrhus in his boyhood, and of his legitimate children by Lanassa, the daughter of Cleodaeus the son of Hyllus, one was named by him Pyrrhus. Consequently Achilles also obtained divine honours in Epeirus, under the native name of Aspetus. But the kings who followed in this line soon lapsed into barbarism and became quite obscure, both in their power and in their lives, and it was Tharrhypas, historians say, who first introduced Greek customs and letters and regulated his cities by humane laws, thereby acquiring for himself a name.

Quote:

Strabo: He has written about the passengers traveling along Egnatia road(Via Egnatia): "Starting from Epidamnus(Durres,Dyrrahio) and down to Apollonia, in the Right they have the tribes of Epirus....., in the Left they have the mountains of Illyria.....Then Sailing from Ambracian Golf and on, the places which is in the East and across Peloponnesous are Hellenic.

Actually this is a distortion of the quote for obvious reasons. There is no reference to Hellenic as in an ethnologic sense, but the phrase is "belong to Hellas" (τῆς Ἑλλάδος ἐστίν) in a geographical one.(Strabo's Geography 7.7.4.29)

Quote:

Also he writes: "After the Epirots and Illyrians, from the Hellenes are Akarnanes,Etoles,Lokries and Ezoles

Another conveniently nit-picked quote since our friend obviously ignores the texts. Strabo has clarified why he presents a distinction between Hellenes and Epeirotes, the reason is found in 5.2.4

Quote:

Strabo Geography 5.2.4 τὰ Ἠπειρωτικὰ ἔθνη Πελασγικὰ εἰρήκασιν, ὡς καὶ μέχρι δεῦρο ἐπαρξάντων· Πελασγούς translation many have called the tribes of Epirus Pelasgian," because in their opinion the Pelasgi extended their rule even as far as that

Quote:

Ephores: He writes : "the Head(start) of Hellas, is Akarnania from the West ,because it is the first that contacts with the Epirot tribes"

Actually this quote derives from Strabo's Geography who's quoting and comments the lost work of Ephoros, a comment that clarifies and proves that the use of this quote is intentionally taken out of context.

Quote:

Strabo Geography 8.1.3 Ephorus says that, if one begins with the western parts, Acarnania is the beginning of Greece; for, he adds, Acarnania is the first to border on the tribes of the Epeirotes. But just as Ephorus, using the seacoast as his measuring-line, begins with Acarnania, for he decides in favor of the sea as a kind of guide in his description of places, because otherwise he might have represented parts that border on the land of the Macedonians and the Thessalians as the beginning

[Skylax79]

Some notice must be taken of those barbarous or non-Hellenic nations who formed the immediate neighbors of Hellas, west of the range of Pindus, and north of that range which connects Pindus with Olympus, as well as of those other tribes, who, though lying more remote from Hellas proper, were yet brought into relations of traffic or hostility with the Hellenic colonies.
Between the Greeks and these foreign neighbors, the Akarnanians, of whom I have already spoken briefly in my preceding volume, form the proper link of transition. They occupied the territory between the river Achelous, the Ionian sea, and the Ambrakian gulf: they were Greeks, and admitted as such to contend at the Pan-Hellenic games, yet they were also closely connected with the Amphilochi and Agraei, who were not Greeks. In manners, sentiments, and intelligence, they were half-Hellenic and half-Epirotic, like the Italians and the Ozolian Lokrians. Even down to the time of Thucydides, these nations were subdivided into numerous petty communities, lived in unfortified villages, were frequently in the habit of plundering each other, and never permitted themselves to be unarmed : in case of attack, they withdrew their families and their scanty stock, chiefly cattle, to the shelter of difficult mountains or marshes. They were for the most part light-armed, few among them being trained to the panoply of the Grecian hoplite; but they were both brave and skillful in their own mode of warfare, and the sling, in the hands of the Akarnanian, was a weapon of formidable efficiency.
Notwithstanding this state of disunion and insecurity, however, the Akarnanians maintained a loose political league among themselves, and a hill near the Amphilochian Argos, on the shores of the Ambrakian gulf, had been fortified to serve as a judgment-seat, or place of meeting, for the settlement of disputes. And it seems that Stratus and Oeniadae had both become fortified in some measure towards the commencement of the Peloponnesian war. The former, the most considerable township in Akarnania, was situated on the Achelous, rather high up its course, the latter was at the mouth of the river, and was rendered difficult of approach by its inundations. Astakus, Solium, Palaerus, and Alyzia, lay on or near the coast of the Ionian sea, between Oeniadae and Leukas : Phytia, Koronta, Medeon, Limnaea, and Thyrium, were between the southern shore of the Ambrakian gulf and the river Achelous.
The Akarnanians appear to have produced many prophets. They traced up their mythical ancestry, as well as that of their neighbors the Amphilochians, to the most renowned prophetic family among the Grecian heroes; Amphiaraus, with his sons Alkmaeon and Amphilochus : Akarnan, the eponymous hero of the nation, and other eponymous heroes of the separate towns, were supposed to be the sons of Alkmaeon. They are spoken of, together with the Aetolians, as mere rude shepherds, by the lyric poet Alkman, and so they seem to have continued with little alteration until the beginning of the Peloponnesian war, when we hear of them, for the first time, as allies of Athens and as bitter enemies of the Corinthian colonies on their coast. The contact of those colonies, however, and the large spread of Akarnanian accessible coast, could not fail to produce some effect in socializing and improving the people. And it is probable that this effect would have been more sensibly felt, had not the Akarnanians been kept back by the fatal neighborhood of the Aetolians, with whom they were in perpetual feud, a people the most unprincipled and unimprovable of all who bore the Hellenic name, and whose habitual faithlessness stood in marked contrast with the rectitude and steadfastness of the Akarnanian character. It was in order to strengthen the Akarnanians against these rapacious neighbors, that the Macedonian Cassander urged them to consolidate their numerous small townships into a few considerable cities. Partially, at least, the recommendation was carried into effect, so as to aggrandize Stratus and one or two other towns; but in the succeeding century, the town of Leukas seems to lose its original position as a separate Corinthian colony, and to pass into that of chief city of Akarnania, which is lost only by the sentence of the Roman conquerors.
Passing over the borders of Akarnania, we find small nations or tribes not considered as Greeks, but known, from the fourth century BC downwards, under the common name of Epirots. This word signifies properly, inhabitants of a continent, as opposed to those of an island or a peninsula, and came only gradually to be applied by the Greeks as their comprehensive denomination to designate all those diverse tribes, between the Ambrakian gulf on the south and west, Pindus on the east, and the Illyrians and Macedonians to the north and north-east. Of these Epirots, the principal were, the Chaonians, Thesprotians, Kassopians, and Molossians, who occupied the country inland as well as maritime along the Ionian sea, from the Akrokeraunian mountains to the borders of Ambrakia in the interior of the Ambrakian gulf. The Agraeans and Amphilochians dwelt eastward of the last-mentioned gulf, bordering upon Akarnania : the Athamanes, the Tymphaeans, and the Talares, lived along the western skirts and high range of Pindus. Among these various tribes it is difficult to discriminate the semi-Hellenic from the non-Hellenic; for Herodotus considers both Molossians and Thesprotians as Hellenic, and the oracle of Dodona,as well as the Nekyomanteion, or holy cavern for evoking the dead, of Acheron, were both in the territory of the Thesprotians, and both, in the time of the historian, Hellenic. Thucydides, on the other hand, treats both Molossians and Thesprotians as barbaric, and Strabo says the same respecting the Athamanes, whom Plato numbers as Hellenic.
As the Epirots were confounded with the Hellenic communities towards the south, so they become blended with the Macedonian and Illyrian tribes towards the north. The Macedonian Orestea, north of the Cambunian mountains and east of Pindus, are called by Hekataeus a Molossian tribe; and Strabo even extends the designation Epirots to the Illyrian Paroraeia and Atintanes, west of Pindus, nearly on the same parallel of latitude with the Orestae. It must be remembered, as observed above, that while the designations Illyrians and Macedonians are properly ethnical, given to denote analogies of language, habits, feeling, and supposed origin, and probably acknowledged by the people themselves, the name Epirots belongs to the Greek language, is given by Greeks alone, and marks nothing except residence on a particular portion of the continent. Theopompus (about 340 BC) reckoned fourteen distinct Epirotic nations, among whom the Molossians and Chaonians were the principal. It is possible that some of these may have been semi-Illyrian, others semi-Macedonian, though all were comprised by him under the common name Epirots.
Of these various tribes, who dwelt between the Akrokeraunian promontory and the Ambrakian gulf, some, at least, appear to have been of ethnical kindred with portions of the inhabitants of southern Italy. There were Chaonians on the gulf of Tarentum, before the arrival of the Greek settlers, as well as in Epirus; we do not find the name Thesprotians in Italy, but we find there a town named Pandosia, and a river named Acheron, the same as among the Epirotic Thesprotians : the ubiquitous name Pelasgian is connected both with one and with the other. This ethnical affinity, remote or near, between Oenotrians and Epirots, which we must accept as a fact without being able to follow it into detail, consists at the same time with the circumstance, that both seem to have been susceptible of Hellenic influences to an unusual degree, and to have been molded, with comparatively little difficulty, into an imperfect Hellenism, like that of the Aetolian and Akarnanians. The Thesprotian conquerors of Thessaly passed in this manner into Thessalian Greeks, and the Amphilochians who inhabited Argos on the Ambrakian gulf, were Hellenized by the reception of Greeks from Ambrakia, though the Amphilochians situated without the city, still remained barbarous in the time of Thucydides : a century afterwards, probably, they would be Hellenized, like the rest, by a longer continuance of the same influences, as happened with the Sikels in Sicily.
To assign the names and exact boundaries of the different tribes inhabiting Epirus, as they stood in the seventh and sixth centuries BC, at the time when the western stream of Grecian colonization was going on, and when the newly established Ambrakiots must have been engaged in subjugating or expelling the prior occupants of their valuable site, is out of our power. We have no information prior to Herodotus and Thucydides, and that which they tell us cannot be safely applied to a time either much earlier or much later than their own. That there was great analogy between the inland Macedonians and the Epirots, from Mount Bermius across the continent to the coast opposite Kerkira, in military equipment, in the fashion of cutting the hair, and in speech, we are apprized by a valuable passage of Strabo; who farther tells us, that many of the tribes spoke two different languages, a fact which at least, proves very close intercommunion, if not a double origin and incorporation.
Wars, or voluntary secessions and new alliances, would alter the boundaries and relative situation of the various tribes. And this would be the more easily effected, as all Epirus, even in the fourth century BC, was parcelled out among an aggregate of villages, without any great central cities; so that the severance of a village from the Molossian union, and its junction with the Thesprotian (abstracting from the feelings with which it might be connected), would make little practical difference in its condition or proceedings. The gradual increase of Hellenic influence tended partially to centralize this political dispersion, enlarging some of the villages into small towns by the incorporation of some of their neighbors; and in this way, probably, were formed the seventy Epirotic cities which were destroyed and given up to plunder on the same day, by Paulas Emilius and the Roman senate. The Thesprotian Ephyre is called a city, even by Thucydides. Nevertheless, the situation was unfavorable to the formation of considerable cities, either on the coast or in the interior, since the physical character of the territory is an exaggeration of that of Greece, almost throughout, wild, rugged, and mountainous. The valleys and low grounds, though frequent, are never extensive, while the soil is rarely suited, in any continuous spaces, for the cultivation of corn : insomuch that the flour for the consumption of Janina, at the present day, is transported from Thessaly over the lofty ridge of Pindus, by means of asses and mules; while the fruits and vegetables are brought from Arta, the territory of Ambrakia.
TERRITORY OF EPIRUS.
Epirus is essentially a pastoral country : its cattle as well as its shepherds and shepherd’s dogs were celebrated throughout all antiquity; and its population then, as now, found divided village residence the most suitable to their means and occupations. In spite of this natural tendency, however, Hellenic influences were to a certain extent efficacious, and it is to them that we are to ascribe the formation of towns like Phoenike, an inland city a few miles removed from the sea, in a latitude somewhat north of the northernmost point of Corcyra, which Polybius notices as the most flourishing of the Epirotie cities at the time when it was plundered by the Illyrians in 236 BC. Passaron, the ancient spot where the Molossian kings were accustomed on their accession to take their coronation-oath, had grown into a considerable town, in this last century before the Roman conquest; while Tekmon, Phylake, and Horreum also became known to us at the same period. But the most important step which those kings made towards aggrandizement, was the acquisition of the Greek city of Ambrakia, which became the capital of the kingdom of Pyrrhus, and thus gave to him the only site suitable for a concentrated population which the country afforded.
If we follow the coast of Epirus from the entrance of the Ambrakian gulf northward to the Akrokeraunian promontory, we shall find it discouraging to Grecian colonization. There are none of those extensive maritime plains which the gulf of Tarentum exhibits on its coast, and which sustained the grandeur of Sybaris and Kroton. Throughout the whole extent, the mountain-region, abrupt and affording little cultivable soil, approaches near to the sea, and the level ground, wherever it exists, must be commanded and possessed, as it is now, by villagers on hill-sites, always difficult of attack and often inexpugnable. From hence, and from the neighborhood of Corcyra, herself well situated for traffic with Epirus, and jealous of neighboring rivals, we may understand why the Grecian emigrants omitted this unprofitable tract, and passed on either northward to the maritime plains of Illyria, or westward to Italy.
In the time of Herodotus and Thucydides, there seems to have been no Hellenic settlement between Ambrakia and Apollonia. The harbor called Glykys Limen, and the neighboring valley and plain, the most considerable in Epirus, next to that of Ambrakia, near the junction of the lake and river of Acheron with the sea, were possessed by the Thesprotian town of Ephyre, situated on a neighboring eminence; perhaps also, in part, by the ancient Thesprotian town of Pandosia, so pointedly connected, both in Italy and Epirus, with the river Acheron. Amidst the almost inexpugnable mountains and gorges which mark the course of that Thesprotian river, was situated the memorable recent community of Suli, which held in dependence many surrounding villages in the lower grounds and in the plain, the counterpart of primitive Epirotic rulers in situation, in fierceness, and in indolence, but far superior to them in energetic bravery and endurance.
It appears that after the time of Thucydides, certain Greek settlers must have found admission into the Epirotic towns in this region. For Demosthenes mentions Pandosia, Buchetia, and Elaea, as settlements from Elis, which Philip of Macedon conquered and handed over to his brother-in-law the king of the Molossian Epirots; and Strabo tells us that the name of Ephyre had been changed to Kichyrus, which appears to imply an accession of new inhabitants.
Both the Chaonians and Thesprotians appear, in the time of Thucydides, as having no kings : there was a privileged kingly race, but the presiding chief was changed from year to year. The Molossians, however, had a line of kings, succeeding from father to son, which professed to trace its descent through fifteen generations downward, from Achilles and Neoptolemus to Tharypas about the year 400 BC; they were thus a scion of the great Aeakid race. Admetus, the Molossian king to whom Themistocles presented himself as a suppliant, appears to have lived in the simplicity of an inland village chief. But Arrybas, his son or grandson, is said to have been educated at Athens, and to have introduced improved social regularity into his native country : while the subsequent kings both imitated the ambition and received the aid of Philip of Macedon, extending their dominion over a large portion of the other Epirots : even in the time of Skylax, they covered a large inland territory, though their portion of sea-coast was confined.
From the narrative of Thucydides, we gather that all the Epirots, though held together by no political union, were yet willing enough to combine for purposes of aggression and plunder. The Chaonians enjoyed a higher military reputation than the rest, but the account which Thucydides gives of their expedition against Akarnania exhibits a blind, reckless, boastful impetuosity, which contrasts strikingly with the methodical and orderly march of their Greek allies and companions. We may here notice, that the Kassopaeans, whom Skylax places in the south-western portion of Epirus between the Acheron and the Ambrakian gulf, are not noticed either by Herodotus or Thucydides : the former, indeed, conceives the river Acheron and the Thesprotians as conterminous with the Ambrakiotic territory.
To collect the few particulars known respecting these ruder communities adjacent to Greece, is a task indispensable for the just comprehension of the Grecian world, and for the appreciation of the Greeks themselves, by comparison or contrast with their contemporaries. Indispensable as it is, however, it can hardly be rendered in itself interesting to the reader, whose patience I have to bespeak by assuring him that the facts hereafter to be recounted of Grecian history would be only half understood without this preliminary survey of the lands around.

[Eldritch]

@Skylax 79: What you posted has nothing to with this thread.

[Skylax79]

Ancient writers about greekness of Epirus
“Zeus Archon, Dodonean, Pelasgian, who dwells afar, ruling on rough wintered Dodona, surrounded by the Selloi, the interpreters of your divine will, whose feet are unwashed and sleep on the ground”.




Homer, Iliad 16:127 (Achilles prayer)


XI.


“War was at the same time proclaimed against the Tarentines (who are still a people at the extremity of Italy), because they had offered violence to some Roman ambassadors. These people asked aid against the Romans of Pyrrhus, king of Epirus, who derived his origin from the family of Achilles…


XIII.


“…Thus the ambassador of Pyrrhus returned; and, when Pyrrhus asked him “what kind of a place he had found Rome to be,” Cineas replied, that “he had seen a country of kings, for that all there were such, as Pyrrhus alone was thought to be in Epirus and the rest of Greece.”


Eutropius (Abridgment of Roman History) Historiae Romanae Breviarium


“Arha Ellas apo Oricias kai arhegonos Ellas Epiros“


“Greece starts at Oricus and the most ancient part of Greece is Epirus.”


Claudius Ptolemy, The Geographer


“Peleus is the forefather of the kings of Epiros”


Pausanias, II (Corinth).


Peleus being the son of King Aeacus (the dynasty’s name) and the father of Achilles.


but we know of no Greek before Pyrros who fought against Rome


Pausanias, 1.11


“So Pyrros was the first to cross over against Rome from mainland Greece, and even so he went over only because he was called in by Tarentum”


Pausanias, 1.12


[6] Being apprized of Alcmaeon’s untimely end and courted by Zeus, Callirrhoe requested that the sons she had by Alcmaeon might be full grown in order to avenge their father’s murder. And being suddenly full-grown, the sons went forth to right their father’s wrong. Now Pronous and Agenor, the sons of Phegeus, carrying the necklace and robe to Delphi to dedicate them, turned in at the house of Agapenor at the same time as Amphoterus and Acarnan, the sons of Alcmaeon; and the sons of Alcmaeon killed their father’s murderers, and going to Psophis and entering the palace they slew both Phegeus and his wife. They were pursued as far as Tegea, but saved by the intervention of the Tegeans and some Argives, and the Psophidians took to flight.


[7] Having acquainted their mother with these things, they went to Delphi and dedicated the necklace and robe according to the injunction of Achelous. Then they journeyed to Epirus, collected settlers, and colonized Acarnania..


Apollodorus, 3.76-3.77.


[12] After remaining in Tenedos two days at the advice of Thetis, Neoptolemus set out for the country of the Molossians by land with Helenus, and on the way Phoenix died, and Neoptolemus buried him; and having vanquished the Molossians in battle he reigned as king and begat Molossus on Andromache. And Helenus founded a city in Molossia and inhabited it, and Neoptolemus gave him his mother Deidamia to wife. And when Peleus was expelled from Phthia by the sons of Acastus and died, Neoptolemus succeeded to his father’s kingdom.”


Apollodorus, 6.12


“It was for this reason that Pyrrhus was defeated by the Romans also in a battle to the finish. For it was no mean or untrained army that he had, but the mightiest of those then in existence among the Greeks and one that had fought a great many wars; nor was it a small body of men that was then arrayed under him, but even three times as large as his adversary’s, nor was its general any chance leader, but rather the man whom all admit to have been the greatest of all the generals who flourish at that same period;”


Dionysius of Halicarnnasus, Roman Antiquities, 19.11


“Theopompus says, that there are fourteen Epirotic nations. Of these, the most celebrated are the Chaones and Molotti, because the whole of Epirus was at one time subject, first to Chaones, afterwards to Molotti. Their power was greatly strengthened by the family of their kings being descended from the Æacidæ, and because the ancient and famous oracle of Dodona was in their country. Chaones, Thesproti, and next after these Cassopæi, (who are Thesproti,) occupy the coast, a fertile tract reaching from the Ceraunian mountains to the Ambracian Gulf.”


“The Molotti also were Epirotæ, and were subjects of Pyrrhus Neoptolemus, the son of Achilles, and of his descendants, who were Thessalians. The rest were governed by native princes. Some tribes were continually endeavouring to obtain the mastery over the others, but all were finally subdued by the Macedonians, except a few situated above the Ionian Gulf.”


Strabo, 7.7.1


“Pyrrhus, the king of Epirus, had a particularly high opinion of his powers because he was deemed by foreign nations a match for the Romans; and he believed that it would be opportune to assist the fugitives who had taken refuge with him, especially as they were Greeks, and at the same time so forestall the Romans with some plausible excuse before he should suffer injury at their hands. For so careful was he about his good reputation that though he had long had his eye on Sicily and had been considering how he could overthrow the power of the Romans, he shrank from taking the initiative in hostilities against them, when no wrong had been done him.”


Cassius Dio, Book 9.4


19. When Harrybas, king of the Molossians, was attacked in war by Bardylis, the Illyrian, who commanded a considerably larger army, he dispatched the non-combatant portion of his subjects to the neighbouring district of Aetolia, and spread the report that he was yielding up his towns and possessions to the Aetolians. He himself, with those who could bear arms, placed ambuscades here and there on the mountains and in other inaccessible places. The Illyrians, fearful lest the possessions of the Molossians should be seized by the Aetolians, began to race along in disorder, in their eagerness for plunder. As soon as they became scattered, Harrybas, emerging from his concealment and taking them unawares, routed them and put them to flight.


Frontinus, Strategemata, 13


“Alexander, the Epirote, when waging war against the Illyrians, first placed a force in ambush, and then dressed up some of his own men in Illyrian garb, ordering them to lay waste his own, that is to say, Epirote territory. When the Illyrians saw that this was being done, they themselves began to pillage right and left — the more confidently since they thought that those who led the way were scouts. But when they had been designedly brought by the latter into a disadvantageous position, they were routed and killed.

[Skylax79]

This is a tread for Illyria. The caucasian Albanians consider anciet greek Epir as an ancient Illyrian province witch is tottaly wrong! im sorry but i must save the situation

[Skylax79]

In Stephan's the Byzantine period Greece was a roman colony under the names of Macedonia and east Illyricum... Οf course Stephan's The Byzantine considerd epirot areas and rest ancient greek Hellas as "Illyrians"
This map shows my words ...
http://www.emersonkent.com/map_archi...empire_4th.htm

[Skylax79]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7SqAogmDw4
Ancient Illyrian Coins Have GREEK Words.
Tnx 4 watching!

[zanipolo]

@skylax
I think you are mostly correct , epirus was greek linguistically, BUT how did pyrrhus get the illyrian messapic people in Italy to support him and supply him with troops and food

[Skylax79]

Zanipolo.. They were not only the Messapians who supported Pyrro. They were all the greek people in Italy and Cisily.. Some ethnologists consider the Samnites-Savins-Savels as Illyrians but that tribe had the same traditional idioms like Spartans .. Their towns had not walls and their women were equal to men .. After the 3 Savin wars when the Romans had and took the control of central Italy both tribes were united under one state. The Rome. The Patricians came from Samnitae thats why they dressed like typical spartans! Their clothing was thrifty. They had naked chest and down from their weist they had white tunic. Like the Spartans. Pyrro send a greek messanger with the name Cyneas to Patricians of Rome for truce and he started to spoke to them dorian greek dialect!!! The language of Spartans..

[Skylax79]

The big problem for the illyrian issue is that Illyrians had not scripts or graphics so everything is hypothetical for them.. So let speak the stones, the marbles. the statues, the books who had greek and latin language and let the albanian stupidities. In Greece we say.. "Τhe hungry dreams round loaves"

[Skylax79]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0lhMX...eature=related
Even some Albanians says that the modern Albanians have no realations to Illyrians

[Dianatomia]

@skylax
I think you are mostly correct , epirus was greek linguistically, BUT how did pyrrhus get the illyrian messapic people in Italy to support him and supply him with troops and food

Epirus was indeed Greek, but I wouldn't count on that map as evidence.
This map looks like someone had some fun behind his computer. First of all, Greek expansion was not all the way up to Montenegro. Second, evidence points out that ancient Macedonian was most probably part of the Hellenic branch. Third, why are Macedonians situated north of ancient Macedonia? Where are the Paeonians and Dardanians? I'm smell a Balkan nationalist agenda here. Why do these people who create such maps waste their time? In order to change the academic opinion one needs evidence. Coloured maps won't do unfortunatelly.

[zanipolo]

Epirus was indeed Greek, but I wouldn't count on that map as evidence.
This map looks like someone had some fun behind his computer. First of all, Greek expansion was not all the way up to Montenegro. Second, evidence points out that ancient Macedonian was most probably part of the Hellenic branch. Third, why are Macedonians situated north of ancient Macedonia? Where are the Paeonians and Dardanians? I'm smell a Balkan nationalist agenda here. Why do these people who create such maps waste their time? In order to change the academic opinion one needs evidence. Coloured maps won't do unfortunatelly.

the map looks very generous to the greek language - nearly all the black sea , all albania ( there where no albanians there at the time frame of this map ) ...........maybe your are right, and maybe you are wrong.

The illyrians first crossed the neretva river around 400BC ( entering modern montenegro), they where stopped at the drin river and then fought a series of wars against alexander the great and his father.

[Malsori]

Skylax

In my humble opinion neither Albanians neither Greeks have Proto-Illyrian and Proto-Greek blood.Genetically we are mostly Indo-Europeanized Paleo-Balkanoid people except that Albanians have more Atlanto-Baltic component than Greeks so we are a lil bit more Proto-Illyrian than you are Proto-Greek.

Modern Greeks have largely Pelasgian and other Minoan/Anatolian ancestry than from real Indo-European Greeks.

[Yetos]

Skylax

In my humble opinion neither Albanians neither Greeks have Proto-Illyrian and Proto-Greek blood.Genetically we are mostly Indo-Europeanized Paleo-Balkanoid people except that Albanians have more Atlanto-Baltic component than Greeks so we are a lil bit more Proto-Illyrian than you are Proto-Greek.

Modern Greeks have largely Pelasgian and other Minoan/Anatolian ancestry than from real Indo-European Greeks.

It depends,
1rst we know that E Ydna is very old, but we don't know how old is in Balkans,
so it is difficult to claim paleo-Balkan since mostly G-Ydna is not that high

2nd the time age of I-Ydna is uncertain since K Nordvert is giving it very young and in Balkans I Ydna is strong

3rd the time age of J Ydna and its origins gives newer than Paleo Balkanic results


So it seems that both population have Pelasgian component.
Both population have Italian admixture

so?
It seems like Albanian Language at its today from is more younger to Balkans meaning that probably Illyrian (Illyria proprie Dicti and not Illyricum) were a mix of Central Europe with Pelasgians and today Albania has also a Northern component at least in Linguistic,

on the other hand Greece seems to resist more to the linguistic of the East-North migration at Byzantine and medieval times.

Both populations seems to kept mostly the same Y DNA analogy or %'s of that of late Roman times,
and both population manage to assimilate some Thracian blood and Lingua which probably in Albania kept its sounds due to Satem language, while in Greece change due to Centum

I do insist that is another area what Greeks name Illyria and what Romans named Illyricum,


PS
if we follow Kurgan hypothesis then IE language is a language of R1b and R1a
if we follow agricultural hypothesis (Anatolian) then IE is a G-Ydna language

although in second we do not know the role of J2 Ydna which maybe is a strong opponent or ally in agricultural hypothesis

E Ydna in Balkans as also some J components probably can be connected with Levant and Cyprus giving the 'wanted' Pelasgian DNA. (chalkolithic and copper era migrations)

[Dianatomia]

Skylax

In my humble opinion neither Albanians neither Greeks have Proto-Illyrian and Proto-Greek blood.Genetically we are mostly Indo-Europeanized Paleo-Balkanoid people except that Albanians have more Atlanto-Baltic component than Greeks so we are a lil bit more Proto-Illyrian than you are Proto-Greek.

Modern Greeks have largely Pelasgian and other Minoan/Anatolian ancestry than from real Indo-European Greeks.

I think what follows from the genetic research is that Albanians and Greeks largely descent from paleo-balkanic peoples. This is the key. Being proto-something is irrelevant and rather vague.

Little can be said with absolute certainty about how much proto-hellenic blood modern Greeks have. But then again, how much proto-hellenic blood did the Ancient Greeks have? If modern Greeks largely descent from Pelasgians and Minoans (as you claim and I don't disagree), and these people arrived there before the proto-hellenes, then the ancient Greek populations were also largely pelasgian/minoan. Their culture was a mixture of Minoan, Pelasgian, and Indo-european sub-cultures. And their gene pool was a mixture of all these peoples. It is no coincidence that we can see the haplogroups of those peoples in different places colonised by ancient Greeks. From Marsailles to Magna Graecia and beyond.

So, rather than saying Albanians and Greeks are A or B, or were A and are now B. You should take a three dimentional view. I.e. they are A+B+C. Because A didn't go anywhere when C arrived.

[Taranis]

I'd be happier if people would stop using the word "Pelasgian", especially because it certainly does not belong into the Illyrian context. You have to remember that in the myths the Greeks had about their own ancestry, they are variously depicted as either the ancestors of the Greeks or the first known inhabitants of Greece. Conveyed into linguistics, the term may mean any "Pre-Greek" or non-Greek elements into the Greek language that we find. But, there is no archaeological culture we can deem as genuinely "Pelasgian", there was not "one" 'Pelasgian' language either. And the discussion is entirely disconnected from the Illyrians or the Illyrian language(s).

Taking things to the next step and talking about which Haplogroup or which not is "Pelasgian" is folly in my opinion.

[Malsori]

It depends,
1rst we know that E Ydna is very old, but we don't know how old is in Balkans,
so it is difficult to claim paleo-Balkan since mostly G-Ydna is not that high

With Paleo-Balkanoid i didn't mean pre-Neolithic or Early Neolithic but before Indo-Europeanization.Wasn't G linked with Early Neolithic farmers who brought the Mediterranean component in Europe?Surprisingly G Y-DNA is low everywhere in Southern Europe except that we find a ~10-15% percent in Northern Sardinia and Corsica.

2nd the time age of I-Ydna is uncertain since K Nordvert is giving it very young and in Balkans I Ydna is strong

I think Nordvedt's opinion is that I2a2-Din came with South Slavic invasions.It makes sense to me based on modern percentages.

3rd the time age of J Ydna and its origins gives newer than Paleo Balkanic results

Indeed,J2 in Balkans is probably related with Anatolian Neolithic farmers.Though i suppose the J2b2 came earlier than the J2a subclade found on Greeks.

So it seems that both population have Pelasgian component.
Both population have Italian admixture

Weren't the Pelasgians thought to came from Anatolia?What is Italian admixture?Without any aDNA in the Balkans from Neolithic sites we can just make wild guesses.

It seems like Albanian Language at its today from is more younger to Balkans meaning that probably Illyrian (Illyria proprie Dicti and not Illyricum) were a mix of Central Europe with Pelasgians and today Albania has also a Northern component at least in Linguistic,
on the other hand Greece seems to resist more to the linguistic of the East-North migration at Byzantine and medieval times.

If you mean in comparison with Greek language then i agree.

PS
if we follow Kurgan hypothesis then IE language is a language of R1b and R1a
if we follow agricultural hypothesis (Anatolian) then IE is a G-Ydna language

PIE is definitely linked only with R1a1a subclades while IE includes the R1b too.The G Y-DNA is totally excluded from being a Indo-European marker.