Proto-Greeks

[Nik]

I don't wanna get involved much, but wouldn't it be logical that the IE Proto-Hellenes would have to pass through either Epirus or Macedonia or both in order to eventually end up in Greece? Unless it's proven that they came from Anatolia.

With regards to Epirus and Macedonia, a lot happened in those lands and culturally they were more similar to the nearby Illyrians and Thracians then Greeks, with the exception of Aetolians. But even Aetolians seem to have had some Illyrian influence or some possibly Proto-Illyrian tribes settled there.

IMHO, all the confusion comes from using names such as Illyrian, Epirotan, Hellenes, etc. For me its not a matter of who was who, but who became who.

Culturally speaking and from the way of living, I believe the situation between the Pre-Greeks and Pre-Illyrians was the same, the Pre-Greeks being more urban and Pre-Illyrians more tribal. It's not really the merit of the true Hellenes what became to be known as the Greek Civilization as there was always a civilization in those lands. Lets not forget that outside the city walls the countrymen were probably not that different from the Illyro-Thracian barbarians. And we know also for a fact that many non-urban communities in Greece were still non-Greek speaking even until the 5th century BC, so being Greek was more of a social status rather than ethnic division.

Probably it was like being in the European Union

 

[IronSide]

How strong is the argument for Catacomb culture to be the home of the proto-Greeks ? what is the evidence for or against ?

 

[Yetos]

How strong is the argument for Catacomb culture to be the home of the proto-Greeks ? what is the evidence for or against ?

Ironside
Catacomb and Yamnaa are major factors of all European and most IE

we speak about proto Greek
not proto IE

 

[Angela]

The next person to post an off-topic comment will receive an infraction. No more warnings.

 

[IronSide]

Ironside
Catacomb and Yamnaa are major factors of all European and most IE

we speak about proto Greek
not proto IE

Catacomb could be an ancestor to a subgroup of IE speakers, not all of them. the hypothetical Graeco-Armeno-Aryan (fancy name I know) clade of languages could have developed here, as it would explain some shared features among them.

Wikipedia's article on the thing isn't bad so I'll quote:

Graeco-Aryan (or Graeco-Armeno-Aryan) is a hypothetical clade within the Indo-European family, ancestral to the Greek language, the Armenian language, and the Indo-Iranian languages. Graeco-Aryan unity would have become divided into Proto-Greek and Proto-Indo-Iranian by the mid 3rd millennium BC. Conceivably, Proto-Armenian would have been located between Proto-Greek and Proto-Indo-Iranian, consistent with the fact that Armenian shares certain features only with Indo-Iranian (the satem change) but others only with Greek (s > h).
Graeco-Aryan has comparatively wide support among Indo-Europeanists for the Indo-European Homeland to be located in the Armenian Highland.^[1][2][3][4] Early and strong evidence was given by Euler's 1979 examination on shared features in Greek and Sanskrit nominal flection.^[5]
Used in tandem with the Graeco-Armenian hypothesis, the Armenian language would also be included under the label Aryano-Greco-Armenic, splitting into proto-Greek/Phrygian and "Armeno-Aryan" (ancestor of Armenian and Indo-Iranian).^[6][7]
In the context of the Kurgan hypothesis, Greco-Aryan is also known as "Late PIE" or "Late Indo-European" (LIE), suggesting that Greco-Aryan forms a dialect group which corresponds to the latest stage of linguistic unity in the Indo-European homeland in the early part of the 3rd millennium BC. By 2500 BC, Proto-Greek and Proto-Indo-Iranian had separated, moving westward and eastward from the Pontic Steppe, respectively.^[8]
If Graeco-Aryan is a valid group, Grassmann's law may have a common origin in Greek and Sanskrit. Note, however, that Grassmann's law in Greek postdates certain sound changes that happened only in Greek and not Sanskrit, which suggests that it cannot strictly be an inheritance from a common Graeco-Aryan stage. Rather, it is more likely an areal feature that spread across a then-contiguous Graeco-Aryan–speaking area after early Proto-Greek and Proto-Indo-Iranian had developed into separate dialects but before they ceased being in geographic contact.
Graeco-Aryan is invoked in particular in studies of comparative mythology, e.g. by West (1999)^[9] and Watkins (2001).^[10]

Eupedia's page on Catacomb mentions this:

A new funeral practice emerged with the modelling of a clay mask over the face of the deceased. These masks may have been the prototypes of the Mycenaean gold masks, like the famousMask of Agamemnon

So if I were to guess this is where the first Greek speakers emerged, it would be here, after that they probably migrated directly to the Balkans, and not through the Caucasus, simply because there is no evidence for such movement.

 

[Yetos]

Catacomb could be an ancestor to a subgroup of IE speakers, not all of them. the hypothetical Graeco-Armeno-Aryan (fancy name I know) clade of languages could have developed here, as it would explain some shared features among them.

Wikipedia's article on the thing isn't bad so I'll quote:



Eupedia's page on Catacomb mentions this:



So if I were to guess this is where the first Greek speakers emerged, it would be here, after that they probably migrated directly to the Balkans, and not through the Caucasus, simply because there is no evidence for such movement.

I know Greco-Aryan theory, and is very good tested as conserning the Homeric
but this theory, as genertally the Greek language fits better with Renfrew theory of neolithic farmers
than the Gibutas Kurgans etc, Yamnaas etc.

Greco-Aryan theory is familiar to Auth, and most genetists accept more easy Renfrew than other theories.

the Armenia hypothesis is another theory.

anyway in Greece we have 2 +1 major theories, and both seem correct

1 is the Giannopoulos work
which express better the Mycenean and their connection with Croatia Serbia
Vucedol or Vucocar and Vatin (lately I found the term proto-cetina, but I still like the correct names)
this culture armor is connected with Mycenean armor and Minoan labrys
ISBN 978-960-524-393-73

so proto- Mycenean Greek should been spoken South of Istros around Croatia and Serbia and from there start their aspiration differences to finalize to Mycenean Greek and Linear B.

2 is the Auth aproach
τριανταφυλλιδης triantafyllidis
that explains better the IEnization of Greece,
it more closer to Renfrew theory for a specific reason
the % of palaiolithic vs % of neolithic vs % of IE (steppe etc) admixture
that reason is the major reason why Greco-Aryan is grandly accepted in Greece.

the +1 theory came from the work of Georgiev and Duridanov and most recent linguists,
that does search the genetic but the connection and aspiration and glottochronology and isotones by pure words
by that Greek has only one brother language Brygian which is Thracian for ancients
so by that and archaiology ether Vucedol either Anatolian
proto Greek were spoken beside Brygian and Brygian beside rest Thracian,
that is giving the following maps

that is correct either we follow the vucedol-vatin to Mycenean
either we speak about Neolithic populations
cause the density of neolithic and Palaiolithic is high

on the other hand the Mycenean although seems to be connected with Vucedol-vatin
shows also long corridors etc culture,
that is connected either with Minoans, either with Arcadians (Arzawa-Assuwa)
or a third less known like Pelasgians (might be Etruscans)

 

[spartan owl]

About your irony, i will find the time and the post mentioned by you and i will answer. I avoided the answer because is useless to spend my time with you. I know who you are.
The rest of your post is crap.

yes i may be wrong but we can not know until you answer, instead you just decided to skip the facts, and the facts are:
1. if epirotans were not greeks then why pyrrhus did use the greek alphabet and language in his coins and with the correct grammar non the less "basileos pyrrou " ?
2. why did he had a greek name (the legend of deukalion and his wife pyrrha)?
3. why he gave a greek name in all of his children alexandros ptolemeos elenos and olympia?
4. why did he worship the greek gods as his name and his daughter olympia also prove?
so yes i believe that epirotans were greeks and probably epirus was the land from were the dorians started their invasion of southern greece.
And in fact the epirotan language is amongst the doric dialects.If you want any references just go to wkipedia on doric dialects there are plenty of them.

 

[LABERIA]

yes i may be wrong but we can not know until you answer, instead you just decided to skip the facts, and the facts are:
1. if epirotans were not greeks then why pyrrhus did use the greek alphabet and language in his coins and with the correct grammar non the less "basileos pyrrou " ?
2. why did he had a greek name (the legend of deukalion and his wife pyrrha)?
3. why he gave a greek name in all of his children alexandros ptolemeos elenos and olympia?
4. why did he worship the greek gods as his name and his daughter olympia also prove?
so yes i believe that epirotans were greeks and probably epirus was the land from were the dorians started their invasion of southern greece.
And in fact the epirotan language is amongst the doric dialects.If you want any references just go to wkipedia on doric dialects there are plenty of them.

Excuse me but there are two pages deleted by the mods before this your post.
You can believe whatever you want, it's your right to do. If you want to discuss about Epir open a new thread because this is considered of topic.
And don't forget something very important, we are discussing about history not about the legends and mythology of ancient greeks and the new legends of neogreeks in Wikipedia.

 

[spartan owl]

Excuse me but there are two pages deleted by the mods before this your post.
You can believe whatever you want, it's your right to do. If you want to discuss about Epir open a new thread because this is considered of topic.
And don't forget something very important, we are discussing about history not about the legends and mythology of ancient greeks and the new legends of neogreeks in Wikipedia.

epiros is strongly connected to the proto-greeks as the post of yetos also demonstrated, so the discussion about epirus is not off topic.
Also the religion and myths of the epirotans are part of the historical discussion particularly when they prove the national self-identification of a people.
So you decided to skip the questions again and accusing the Wikipedia to be run by Greek nationalists.
If you have something to say about proto-greeks please illuminate us.

 

[LABERIA]

epiros is strongly connected to the proto-greeks as the post of yetos also demonstrated, so the discussion about epirus is not off topic.
Also the religion and myths of the epirotans are part of the historical discussion particularly when they prove the national self-identification of a people.
So you decided to skip the questions again and accusing the Wikipedia to be run by Greek nationalists.
If you have something to say about proto-greeks please illuminate us.

Who is/are the author/s of those maps?

 

[Diomedes]

Laberia, why are you like this all time? Are you saying the opposite just to be against us? Why this behavior towards Epirus (and do not call it Epir; Epirus is the region's name in English) when you clearly understand that this region is mostly relevant to Greece than Illyria?

 

[LABERIA]

Laberia, why are you like this all time? Are you saying the opposite just to be against us? Why this behavior towards Epirus (and do not call it Epir; Epirus is the regions name in English) when you clearly understand that this regions is mostly relevant to Greece than Illyria?

I think mods can give an answer to this your post.

 

[Yetos]

Again the same terrorist booms the place.

 

[ΠΑΝΑΞ]

.
At least @Yetos maps confirmed Aristotle, and Epirus still on the play.
By the way, I like the first map. Μy origins fell exactly, at the core of the Proto-Greeks /Achelloos Valley; Athamanian Mt.s; Thessalian Agrapha; ( Alexis Tsipras origins too... neighbourhood! -Now that turns spookie!) and Trikkala;
Interesting for me is the myth about "Athamas" as releated with the myth of Phrixos and Hellee...>> Jason and the Argonauts... etc etc. - or not...?
also
If I remember well a root of "Achel" or something like that, is a Proto- Thracian (!) which respond to the meaning "water",>> which fit well with the Achelloos river - given as the name of the God river Achelloos >>which also, with all reasons the greatest -as attested as genelal ,god river of mythology. Famous the battle with Hercules. etc
I find that very interesting.


Aristotle is master of classification/ taxonomization Can somebody imagine other more reliable as a source!?
Undeniable.

 

[Yetos]

Greco-Aryan Aproach

the bellow video is from Triantafyllides AuTh (Thessaloniki Makedonia University)
everybody knows that the most advanced research lab in Greece is in DuTh (Thrace) (PhD Paschou)


sorry it is in Greek language
but that is why Pr Triantafyllides is more fan of Anatolian Hypothesis (Renfrew) than Kurgan (Gibutas)

Greco-Aryan connection

min 45:05

from than 2900 results
found 16 HG of Ydna
and 24 of mtDNA
11 % is very old palaiolithic population
59% is post glacial (after glacial era)
20% is pure neolithic farmers
10 % is copper-bronze age

 

[Yetos]

Other IE Aproach (Myceneans and Dorians)

the bellow video (sorry is in Greek)
it is from Giannopoulos
I mention him at post # 26
his work is prolonged by PhD of Princeton (Angelos Chaniotis)

According this Myceneans came from what I say Vucedol-Vucocar-Vatin central North Balkans
some modern call it proto Cetina
that theory is first express 1928 by Carl Blegen around 3000-2000 BC (min 43:27)
and later by Giannaras, who believed that Myceneans and Dorians were the same
But after 1980's it is clear and proved that descent of Myceneans at south Greece is around 2200 BC +- 150 years (min 18:01)
and Dorians descent is not older than 911 BC +- mistake (archailogical radiocarbon estimation)
as also we have no prove of Dorian descent farther than countable km from Doris (Δωρις-Δωριδα)
and that makes it more a local devastation, comparing the one with Myceneans (min
that is why modern believe the area surround Trikkaioi (Τρικαλα) Δωριεις Τριχακες (upper West Thessaly-South East Epiros).

Some interesting

Παριο χρονικο Pario chronicles
(genealogy from 1581n-264 BC) (min 21:16)

Dorian Era vs Mycenean era (20:10)

IE urheimat theories (min 32:39)

thomas Kuhn and revolutionary science
and the effort to find IE through common linguistic Archaiology mettalurgy etc.

the Lerna archaiological founds and the strange disrupt and continue of Early Helladic civilization II to Early HElladic III before the Middle Helladic (min 44:43)

The Mycenean Greece (57:33)

 

[Yetos]

The Linguistic Aproach via IE revolutionary science method

the best results on Greek and Thracian came from Georgiev and Duridanov
vladimir Georgiev estimates even notable and comparable dates via glottochronology

by his book
<<The Proto-Greek region included Epirus, approximately up to Αυλών in the north including Paravaia, Tymphaia, Athamania, Dolopia, Amphilochia, and Acarnania), west and north Thessaly (Hestiaiotis,, Perrhaibia, Tripolis, and Pieria), i.e. more or less the territory of contemporary northwestern Greece)>>

Another interesting view is from
Hooker 1976
the local autochthonus language
which later 2003 Renfrew express as the Anatolian Hypothesis (neolithic farmers spoke IE)

also a new view Based on Anatolian hypothesis is by
Gray & Atkinson & Greenhill 2011
according that proto-Greek first Spoken in Minor Asia- Anatolia with Tocharian and Armenian !!!!!!!!

(the myth of Dionysus campaign to East???)

 

[Azzurro]

Other IE Aproach (Myceneans and Dorians)

the bellow video (sorry is in Greek)
it is from Giannopoulos
I mention him at post # 26
his work is prolonged by PhD of Princeton (Angelos Chaniotis)

According this Myceneans came from what I say Vucedol-Vucocar-Vatin central North Balkans
some modern call it proto Cetina
that theory is first express 1928 by Carl Blegen around 3000-2000 BC (min 43:27)
and later by Giannaras, who believed that Myceneans and Dorians were the same
But after 1980's it is clear and proved that descent of Myceneans at south Greece is around 2200 BC +- 150 years (min 18:01)
and Dorians descent is not older than 911 BC +- mistake (archailogical radiocarbon estimation)
as also we have no prove of Dorian descent farther than countable km from Doris (Δωρις-Δωριδα)
and that makes it more a local devastation, comparing the one with Myceneans (min
that is why modern believe the area surround Trikkaioi (Τρικαλα) Δωριεις Τριχακες (upper West Thessaly-South East Epiros).

Some interesting

Παριο χρονικο Pario chronicles
(genealogy from 1581n-264 BC) (min 21:16)

Dorian Era vs Mycenean era (20:10)

IE urheimat theories (min 32:39)

thomas Kuhn and revolutionary science
and the effort to find IE through common linguistic Archaiology mettalurgy etc.

the Lerna archaiological founds and the strange disrupt and continue of Early Helladic civilization II to Early HElladic III before the Middle Helladic (min 44:43)

The Mycenean Greece (57:33)

If the Mycenaeans did come from the Vucedol-Vucocar-Vatin area then that would make one of their lineages R1b-Z2103, which makes sense and is what many people expect including myself, it would also link Proto-Greek with Proto-Armenian, in the Mathieson paper they found R1b-Z2103 in Vucedol dating to 2884-2666 BC the sample Id is I3499.

 

[Garrick]

If the Mycenaeans did come from the Vucedol-Vucocar-Vatin area then that would make one of their lineages R1b-Z2103, which makes sense and is what many people expect including myself, it would also link Proto-Greek with Proto-Armenian, in the Mathieson paper they found R1b-Z2103 in Vucedol dating to 2884-2666 BC the sample Id is I3499.

R1b-Z2103 found in that time nothing to do with Illyrians because Illyrians emerged between 1300 BC and 1000 BC (different sources), and proto-Illyrians arrived 2000 BC in the Balkans most probably via Bosphorus. It means Vucedol culture nothing to do with Illyrians. R1b-Z2103 can be Mycenaean or maybe some proto-Thracian (for some authors R1b-Z2103 is Dacian marker) or anything else. Surely Mycenaean could be.

J2b2-L283 found in Veliki Vanik in Southern Croatia (1550 BC) can be Mycenaean too. Illyrians emerged in the earliest possible variant 1300 BC. Proto-Illyrians (they are no Illyrians, it is difference) were in Danube region.

Mycenaeans developed complex trade network in Mediterranean since 17th till 11 century BC. They trade with several counties including Italy, from south to north. They probably brought J2b2 L283 in Italy and beyond, wherever they traded. In the isle of Brach was one of Mycenaean points. We can see isle of Brach is very near location in Veliki Vanik where J2b2 L283 is found. And Brach in ancient time traded with region present days southern Dalmatia, Herzegovina.

 

[Azzurro]

R1b-Z2103 found in that time nothing to do with Illyrians because Illyrians emerged between 1300 BC and 1000 BC (different sources), and proto-Illyrians arrived 2000 BC in the Balkans most probably via Bosphorus. It means Vucedol culture nothing to do with Illyrians. R1b-Z2103 can be Mycenaean or maybe some proto-Thracian (for some authors R1b-Z2103 is Dacian marker) or anything else. Surely Mycenaean could be.

J2b2-L283 found in Veliki Vanik in Southern Croatia (1550 BC) can be Mycenaean too. Illyrians emerged in the earliest possible variant 1300 BC. Proto-Illyrians (they are no Illyrians, it is difference) were in Danube region.

Mycenaeans developed complex trade network in Mediterranean since 17th till 11 century BC. They trade with several counties including Italy, from south to north. They probably brought J2b2 L283 in Italy and beyond, wherever they traded. In the isle of Brach was one of Mycenaean points. We can see isle of Brach is very near location in Veliki Vanik where J2b2 L283 is found. And Brach in ancient time traded with region present days southern Dalmatia, Herzegovina.

I don't think Illyrians belonged to R1b-Z2103, but rather to R1b-PF7562. There is various R1b-Z2103 lineages one lineage could be the Mycenaeans, another one can be Dacian, the earliest Armenian speakers most likely belonged to the R1b-Y4364 branch of R1b-Z2103, R1b-Y5587 branch of R1b-Z2103 is very likely Thracian in origin and R1b-A12332 also of R1b-Z2103 is likely Phrygian in origin.

I think a deeper clade test for the J2b-L283 found in Croatia would give the best answer, it can be a proto-Illyrian marker or it can be Greek, for that one we have to wait see.