PDA

View Full Version : 1200BC Invasion of Southeast Europe



Dorianfinder
08-09-11, 00:39
Was it an invasion or a back migration?

Were they predominantly R1b or R1a and if they were in fact R1b, what subclade predominated?

R1b-P312?
R1b-S116?
R1b-U152?

http://vieilleeurope.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/urnfieldculture_thumb4.jpghttp://lh6.ggpht.com/-6_VHJNv8qJc/TUDK-9WChwI/AAAAAAAAan4/BiSNVbqDTh0/Invasions_and_Migrations_in_the_Mediterranean_c._1 200_BC.jpg

Asturrulumbo
08-09-11, 01:24
Are you suggesting that the (probably) pre-proto-Celts of the Urnfield Culture are the Sea Peoples? Or am I misinterpreting you (which happens fairly often in internet forums)?

Bodin
08-09-11, 02:17
Peleshets were probably not R1b , because they are probably same with Balkanis Pelazgi , and with Philisteans from Bible - today Palestinians . Or/and they are conected with city of Pillos
It is said in Egyptian sources that Tiekeri are releted to Peleshets. Other then that I do not have idea which nation would they be.
About others I am not shore , but Lukka could very easily be R1b - they are probably one of nations in Hettite empire that speacked IE . Lykia could get it name by them -so maybe they lived there.
About Shardana they could be from Sardinia , but also from Lybia- Egyptian name for Berbers is Shardana .
Denyens could be same as Danayans - Hellens( before Doric settlement - Mycenean Greeks ) . In Illiade Homerus call all of Greeks Danayans .
Ahiavashe could also be Helens -Ahayans
Shekhelesh could be Sikuli
Tereshi - Tirsens - Etruscans ( in that time in Asia Minor )
I am not shore who could be Ekveshi or Wesheshi
All of this is guessing by name simillarity , and same aeria of living , so its by no means certain , but I hope it would help . ( Non of it is my guessing , but by various scientist that use to work on this problem )

Dorianfinder
08-09-11, 10:43
Are you suggesting that the (probably) pre-proto-Celts of the Urnfield Culture are the Sea Peoples? Or am I misinterpreting you (which happens fairly often in internet forums)?

The Sea Peoples and the proto-Celts? No, I was suggesting that the Sea Peoples were active during the period and that it may have been precipitated by the migration of people from the Celtic North who were technologically advanced. The Northern migration into Southeast Europe, who were they?


http://lh5.ggpht.com/-mOq3t1AuEb4/TSfGQQjUAaI/AAAAAAAAYNs/MNUb-YKIsaQ/s512/migrazioni.jpg
http://sitemaker.umich.edu/mladjov/files/seapeoples.jpg

Taranis
08-09-11, 15:24
Let me say this: I do not think that the Sea Peoples were a homogenous ethnic group. It's very obvious they weren't. Also, even though some of the Sea People names recorded in the Egyptian sources sound similar to the names of later ethnic groups (such as "Shekelesh" as Sicules, or "Sherden" and "Sardinians", this is unfortunately little more than speculation).

One example I would like to comment on are the "Thur(i)sha" and their equation with the Etruscans. One problem is that the Etruscan endonym was "Rasna" or "Rasena". In contrast "Tyrsenoi" (which is supposed to be a cognate of Egyptian "ThRSh") is a Greek exonym. On the other hand, there is the possibility that Tyrsenoi is derived from Ras(e)na.

Regardless of this, it is reasonable safe to assume that the Sea Peoples invasion, and the Bronze Age collapse in the Eastern Mediterranean was not limited to that region, and that there is evidence for widespread turmoil and upheavel in much of northern and western Europe. So, even if the Sea Peoples were not directly related with the movements of peoples in northern and western Europe, they were part of the same phenomenon.

Dorianfinder
08-09-11, 16:07
Let me say this: I do not think that the Sea Peoples were a homogenous ethnic group. It's very obvious they weren't. Also, even though some of the Sea People names recorded in the Egyptian sources sound similar to the names of later ethnic groups (such as "Shekelesh" as Sicules, or "Sherden" and "Sardinians", this is unfortunately little more than speculation).

One example I would like to comment on are the "Thur(i)sha" and their equation with the Etruscans. One problem is that the Etruscan endonym was "Rasna" or "Rasena". In contrast "Tyrsenoi" (which is supposed to be a cognate of Egyptian "ThRSh") is a Greek exonym. On the other hand, there is the possibility that Tyrsenoi is derived from Ras(e)na.

Regardless of this, it is reasonable safe to assume that the Sea Peoples invasion, and the Bronze Age collapse in the Eastern Mediterranean was not limited to that region, and that there is evidence for widespread turmoil and upheavel in much of northern and western Europe. So, even if the Sea Peoples were not directly related with the movements of peoples in northern and western Europe, they were part of the same phenomenon.

The parallels are dubious I agree and the term Sea Peoples is more conspicuous almost suggesting a political spin doctor of possible Egyptian capacity may have tried to condemn this group by not allowing them a name, a simple and effect tactic even used today.

Possibly indicating that they were almost bandit-like and lacking any form of central authority. I think you are right when characterizing them a 'phenomenon' as opposed to a people who banded together to fight the oppressive authorities of the time. Something must have allowed them this opportunity and a migration into the South of freemen-warriors of the Northern persuasion reminds us of the Normans of Sicily and the Crusades. Maybe there are parallels to the crusades with a different objective in mind, agricultural land and mineral wealth.

Bodin
08-09-11, 16:18
I to believe all of Europe and Mediteranean , were in turmoil during so called antiquty Dark Ages ( XIII - IX century BC ) .
1250 Phrygians move from Balkans to Asia Minor , and probably pushing sea peoples to move and raids around 1230 .They destroy Hittite empire , and forcing Egypt out of Syrria . Philisteans settle in aeria , and Jews around X century BC.
Around 1250 Baltic peoples from around Vistula and Odra probably moved north and east in lands of Finns .
By legend in XIII century BC Acheans conquer Troy
In XII century Doric migration in Greece , they destroyed Micenean civilisation eventualy. Acheans are pushed to move to Asia Minor , Aegean Islands and Crete, forming colonies there.
XII century Celts folowing Danube to west setle in south Germany and central Gaul , later moving in Iberia , and finaly Britain
XII century Illyrians move to Italy - becoming Messapic , it is also believed this is the time when Osco - Umbrians moved ( first Italic come 2000 BC , this was second wave) to Italy.
XI century arival of Thracians
IX century BC Ethruscans move to Italy

Bodin
08-09-11, 16:22
That movement could simply be caused by finding of stronger -iron wepons on north , so northern tribes simply defeated and pushed southern tribes to move

Taranis
08-09-11, 16:31
That movement could simply be caused by finding of stronger -iron wepons on north , so northern tribes simply defeated and pushed southern tribes to move

Iron working was definitely a factor in the Bronze Age Collapse, but not in the way you imagine it. First off, iron working didn't actually arrive in northern Europe until centuries later. The Celtic-speaking world didn't widely use iron until the 8th/7th century BC. Additionally, until the development of steels, iron was actually less durable than bronze. The big advantage that you have with iron is that once you know how to smelt iron ore, you only need it. Bronze is an alloy and you need copper and tin, which are almost never found at one spot. Tin from Britain was traded as far as Egypt during the bronze age. So, this means the woes and upheavals in northern and western Europe were indeed related with the advent of iron working in the Eastern Mediterranean, but only indirectly: the decreased need of tin and copper probably triggered an economic crisis and collapse of the old trade networks.

Bodin
08-09-11, 16:50
Thanks for corection