GENTI and Son of Black Eagle

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Alexander the Great Q&A Forum : One Thread

You will find this Scholarly site very interesting!!! http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3atext%3a1999%2e04%2e0064&query=id%3depeirus#id,epeirus

This has to be one of the longest addresses I have ever seen.

You will see was the world academia believes about Epirus. Enjoy the article, and I will also post a lot of information by Herodotus that supports much of what they said. Tufts University is one of the best Historical and Ancient studies schools in the world. So there is no bias and no propoganda.

-- Anonymous, January 19, 2005

Answers

I'm sorry I haven't had time to respond lately, but I have been working about 60 hours a week for the past 3 weeks at my new job. The translation from my aunt was almost identical to the one I posted. What is meant by "macedonians from upper Illyria" was not that the Macedonian people origninated from there, instead it means that the "Macedonian Army" came down from upper Illyria to fight the people in Edessa. I.E. they were on a military campaign in upper Illyria before they went to Edessa. The Macedonians still originated from the Mt Olympus area. Their territory was expanded to include Edessa and further North and East at a later period, which this inscription discusses.

I will try to respond more often, because I enjoy the debates, but I am usually to tired to get on the internet when I get home. I know my work hours will drop to around 40 in the next week or two, so hopefully I will be able to have a little more personal time. Until then everyone think of a new topic, and good luck in school and everything else.

-- Anonymous, February 19, 2005


Things have been very quite around here!

-- Anonymous, February 18, 2005

Hej what's up in here??did you come to a conclusion James?You said you will translate the script by your own and I waited.Do you have any idea how it could be written in that way "macedonians from upper illyria"? waiting fo your reply

-- Anonymous, February 18, 2005

Thank you for translating the page james

-- Anonymous, January 29, 2005

I got the info off this site

http://www.macedonia.com/english/origin.html

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2005



Hey Bill, post the site or book you found that info in.

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2005

Origin of the ancient Macedonians, The Thracians, having arrived first, occupied the eastern part of the peninsula and Macedonia. The Greeks probably came after the Thracians, about 2500 B. C., making their way through the valleys of Axios, the Morava (Margos) and the mountainous passes of Illyria. They stopped at the Western part of the Balkan pleninsula and Macedonia, which was seized from the Thracians. This land has been their station and was Arian-Greek for many centuries before Southern Greece became Greek. Further movements to the south were obstructed by the chain of the Kambounian mountains and Olympus. It was then that they built in Amphaxitis' and further south, the cities of Eidomene, Europus, Atalante, Gortynia, Ichnae, Dion.

About five centuries later the Thracians regained Central Macedonia as a result of which some Greek tribes, such as the Ionians and Achaeans occupying the afore- mentioned cities,, were forced to submit but retained the names of their native towns, while others moved south- ward and built new cities by the same names in various parts, especially in Arcadia, where, according to Strabo only Achaeans settled (Gortys-Gortynia, Europus, Eidomene, Atalante). Others, such as the Penestae of northern Macedonia who spoke an archaic dialect, settled in Thessaly, having left behind them the name of the old country Penestia in its original seat.

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2005


On the page "The Illyrian Origin of ancient Macedonians"

The first paragraph starts by describing The history of Macdedonia and that the founder of the Macedonian dynasty was Perdicas(also known as Karanos)This was in the area of Pella-Emathia "This is not the case though because Perdicas was the 4th king"(MY OWN WORDS). He later discusses Phillip II expanded the territory of the Macedonians as to cover all of Macedonia and Thrace. It continues by claiming that the Greek Historiography has hid the fact that the ancient Macedonians came from the northern Balkans and had Illyrian ancestry.

The next paragraph states there are many researchers among them Greeks. Who show that without a doubt that the Macedonians had Illyrian blood. The macedonians belonged to the indoeuropean language group, they spoke the Macedonian Language which is related to Illyrian and not Greek, and they conquered the land of Midas and they drove out the Phrygians and the Lydians to Anatolia.

The naxt paragraph discusses the macedonians changing the name of Edessa into Aegae. Edessa was the oldest city in Europe and was built during the first part of the Bronze age around the middle of the third Millenia. The name derives from the Phrygian word "Beda" meaning "water". The names using etymology goes from (Bedi-Fedi-Edi- Edessa).This coincides with all the Slavic languages that use the word "Boda" (Bedi=Boda). This proves that the forerunners to the indoeuropean arrival were the Slavs and the Phrygians. And according to the writings on Egypt by Herodotus the Phrygians are the oldest civilization, even older than the Egyptians.

Next,The word Imathia is clearly of Illyrian origin "Imathjia" which means "Big City". The first Macedonians were called "Imathians" it was later changed to Macedonian.

Next he mentions that the below are listed fragments from remaining papyrus belonging to the Chalcidan poet Euphorion who was the librarian in Antioch during the time of Alexander the Great. These descibe the history of Edessa from it's Phrygian beginnings to the time it was changed by Karanos(Perdicas) into Aegae.

I don't have time to finish at the moment so I will post more tomorrow. I hope this is the section you are wanting translated. Keep in mind this is not an exact translation, but a generalizing of what he is writing. The page I am translating is

http://www.geocities.com/bulgarmark/albanian_origin.htm

I will translate the next few quotes tomorrow. If this isn't what you wanted please post the exact address of the page you want me to translate.

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2005


James in that site I gave you about the Illyrian Heritage of the Macedonian people coming from upper Ilyria there is a TEXT in Greek Language.I can't undestand it.It's not even in English.Could you please translate me the main idea of their conclusions.I would appreciate it.Thank you

-- Anonymous, January 28, 2005

I meant to put "only this army started up in upper Illyria(not macedonia).

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2005


Genti here is a site that discusses the origins of the Indo-European language groups and their origins and migrations. It discusses the pre-Satem and the Satem groups and their migrations and there place of settlements. It has all Indo-Europeans coming from central Europe and expanding outwards. You will see that it is believed that the Greeks all came from the same area and that they just settled in different parts of Greece. The same happened for the Illyrians, etc..

http://www.ship.edu/~cgboeree/inodeuropean.html

The script doesn't say that Perdicas(and the Macedonians) came from Upper Illyria. It says their starting point for this phase of conquest over Edessa started in Upper Illyria.(Meaning they were probably on a campaign in upper Illyria and then moved south towards Edessa. Only this army started in upper Macedonia before attacking Edessa.) Like I said in my last post it is probably from the 7th century because it mentions a Perdicas. Perdicas was the 4th king of Macedonia. Of course this could just be a cousin or some great uncle from the 9th century. Now remember both names Perdicas and Argeos are GREEK. Argeos is taken from their homeland Argos in the Peloponnese. Why else would a people name their city the same as another Greek people?? This would only stand to show that these two people(Spartans and Macedonians) are of the same Greek group originally.

Now for what you say about the upper Illyrians is true. But the script doesn't say that upper Illyria is the homeland of Perdicas and his warriors, it only states that was their starting point before coming down to attack Edessa. On your posting of the site www.unrv.com it says "Unlike OTHER GREEK peoples who lived in or around large city-states, the early Epirots lived in clusters of small villages." Also read what it says about them from the beginning of the article. As you can see it states "Unlike other GREEK people..." That refers to them as being Greek but different from the others due to their living manners. This is exactly what I was saying about them before and why they were called "Barbarous". This is the first time I have seen this site, so I wouldn't have recieved my information from it. Next it says they were Hellenized. This is a generic term used to descibe all the other Greeks(combining the Hellenes and the Greeks). Since the Epirots didn't have a culture that had art, government, architecture, literature, etc. like the other Greeks did they say (the Epirots adopted Hellenic culture). This refers to what I just said.

I hope you can finally see that the Epirots were not Illyrian, but a pastoral Greek people who lived differently than all the other Greeks except for the Macedonians.(Whom they resembled in some manners.)This is also shown from Skylax who clearly seperates them from the Illyrian tribes and Nation.

As soon as I get the translation from my aunt I will post it.

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2005


You guys are never going to agree. Im with James on this. Take my advice GENTI, don't mess with what you don't understand.

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2005

Tribes of Epirus Epirote tribes were mostly Hellenized (adapted to Greek culture) Illyrians. Unlike other Greek peoples who lived in or around large city-states, the early Epirotes lived in clusters of small villages.

The Chaoni resided in northern Epirus, and the Thesproti in the South. Both were members of the Epirote League that allied with Rome during the Macedonian Wars.

The most powerful of the tribes, the Molossi, were the dominant players in Epirus. They formed the early dynastic kingdoms of the region and were the ruling class prior to Roman conquest. They supported Macedonia against Rome and paid the price in the slavery of its people.

Source: http://www.unrv.com/provinces/epirus.php

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2005


James I use the term "GREEK" because I got used to.I know very well that GREAKI is a Latin mutation.I know that HELLEN is the right term to be used.

So concerning the translation of the script I see clearly the words "Upper Illyria".So can we decide James?Where did the Hellen nations come from?From Central Europe or from Minor-Asia or Caucasus??

Well I don't think my own that the Doric and Acheans flourished into the Balkans from central Europe and it's hard for me to believe that existed some other Hellenic tribes named Macedonians came from another place than Indo-European Plateas.

As we know for sure (from Ancient Greek historians) that Upper Illyria was composed from the tribes of the Dalmatians,Paenonians (or Paones) and from the Liburni.we can also say that Venetians were also of Illyrian origin from the studies made to their left names like Veneti = Venti in Albanian meaning 1.place 2.country and Trieste = Meaning "Market" in Albanin.)

Have you got any references older than this script I showed to you showing of the Macedonian arrival to the Balkans and about their Hellenic heritage???

I am waiting for the translation by your aunt.

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2005


I just read and translated the script myself using the "modern greek" version. I have given the text which is in ancient Greek to my aunt who is an archaeologist in Greece for over 30 years. The ancient Greek text uses different words than what the guy used for the modern greek text.

Here is what the text actually says.

"Perdicas son of Argaios, head of the warriors, once he arrived at the acropolis of Edessa, starting off from upper-Illyria, he made a sacrifice to the high god Sabazo(this is also an epithet for Dionysus). In the continuation since becoming Lord of the country of Midas, the foreign Greeks immediately angrilly eradicated them because they were burdened with indolence/wickidness. Meanwhile the native Phrygians were left to wander far away because these two people were foreign speaking. From then until he was the old king of Phrygias he took advantage of the very archaic city of Edessa. First he renamed it to Aegae, then he hindered the exiles from returning, except those who were seized as captives. This marble epigraph/inscription was engraved in the Greek language by Dredas son of Gordios as a record of this memory/remembrance."

Even if I accept this text as being authentic it would only prove that the Macedonians were Greek and spoke Greek in the 9th century. This would be much earlier than any other Greeks sent colonies out around the Aegean and the Adriatic.

Me and my mother translated this text with the aid of an ancient Greek dictionary. As soon as I recieve the "Ancient Greek" translation from my aunt I will post it.

As you can see the Macedonians were called "Foreign Greeks" who came down from the northern parts of Illyria(maybe after another battle with the Illyrians) to attack Edessa. Edessa is not ancient Aegae, Aegae is at Vergina where all the tombs of the royals and commoners have been found, along with the theatre in which Phillip was assassinated. There is no theatre in Edessa.

Next Perdicas was the 4th king of the Macedonians who ruled from 670- 652 B.C.E. So if this inscription is real it wouldn't be from the 9th century B.C.E it would be from the 7th century. It is known that the Macedonians expanded there borders during Perdicas' reign and later under Phillip. So this could be a story told by the Phrygians who survived the attack.(Who obviously knew how to read and write in Doric Greek. Thus showing that they were occupied by the Dorian speaking Macedonian people. Otherwise they wouldn't be writing in Doric Greek because the Greek colonies in the Chalcidice, which would have influenced them, were Attic speaking.)

Next the author states it was found near the borders in Macedonia. He then says that an amatuer archaeologist who lives in Edessa(Greece) bought it and the Greek government refuses to give him a liscence of personal ownership. At the end it states it is in a "safe place inside the Republic of Macedonia." This makes absolutely no sense!!! If it was found in Greece it is owned by the Greek people and he has possession of it illegaly. If it was found in Macedonia and was brought over to Greece, then the Greek government has nothing to do with being able to issue a liscence of ownership, it would have been a Skopje issue!! This being the case if it is in the Republic of Macedonia, then there is absolutely no way for the Greek government to cover it up!! It would also mean that the Macedonian government can have all the experts of the world come and study it to give their opinion on the matter, but I don't see any sign of that happening!! I wonder why???!!!

-- Anonymous, January 25, 2005



Skylax didn't refer the the Epiriots as Hellenes because they were not "Hellenes". In the 6th century the only people who were called "Hellenes" were most people from the Peloponnese and the colonies founded by people from the Peloponnese. The others from Attica, Thessaly and Boeotia and their colonist were called by their regions. I.E Thessalians, Ionians, Boeotians, etc. They would not have been called Greek until later. The Greeks claiming descent from "Hellen" called themselves by their founder "Hellen".

He called them as nation because they had a unified tribal organization and they had borders to their territiories. These Greeks didn't claim any descent from "Hellen" so they wouldn't be considered as "Hellenes". Another reason they were not called "Greeks" or "Hellenes" was because they had no cities or city-states(Polis). All the other Greeks had a Polis or city-state and they led a different type of subsistence. Because of this they were considered barbarians. Now the reason the Thracians and the Illyrians were called barbarian, was because they were foreigners.

There is 2 different meanings to the word barbarian. Foreigner and uncivilized. This term has been used against the Spartans by the Athenians because they drank their wine un-cut and they didn't have refined arts like the Athenians. As you noticed he did make a DISTINCT seperation of where the Illyrian tribes started and ended. So if he was in contact with the Illyrians and had heard their language then he would have said the Epiriots were Illyrian if they spoke the same language, but he didn't. He clearly seperated the two groups.

There has been a big problem when discussing "Greece"(a generic term) in the past 100 or so years. The problem is people apply the terms "Hellenes" and "Greeks" as being one in the same and being interchangeable. But they are not. The two terms changed in meaning through different time periods coming to mean the same in recent history. It intitially would have been "Hellenes" in the Peloponnese and their colonies(those claiming descent from Hellen and the Achaeans), and the other Greeks by their region or their mythical founding fathers. Later during the Roman period all Greek speakers were called "Greeks". The term "Graeki" is Roman. Finally there are the "Greeks" who did not claim descent from one of the heroes of the Trojan war. The "Greek" speaking people never called themselves Greeks and still don't. It is a generic term used by the Romans and later the other western countries to describe the people of Greece and the people who spoke the same language.

-- Anonymous, January 24, 2005


What I am about to say is not biased. First off the Greeks were not called Greeks in the 9th century B.C.E. it wasn't until the 6th century that the ROMANS CALLED THE GREEKS "GRAEKI". So for this tablet to have been written in the 9th or 10th century B.C.E. it sure does know how to tell the future.

Second, the Greeks(from central and southern Greece) didn't colonize Chalcidice and the rest of the Aegean until the 7th century. Now this tablet was supposed to be written by a Phrygian. If this was the case (WHY WAS IT WRITTEN IN GREEK USING THE PHOENICIAN ALPHABET??) Third, if this tablet was written by a Phrygian it would show that they would have considered an Ancient form of Doric Greek and the Attic dialect two distinct languages. (EX. if a Greek of the Classical period tried to speak with a Mycenaean he wouldn't be able to understand him.) It would be unintelligable and if a Greek couldn't understand then why would a Phrygian distinguish two distinct dialects as being different versions of the same language??

Fourth, the name Perdicas is also Greek. Fifth, yes one of the Phrygian Kings was Midas, but the history books already discuss the Macedonians moving the Phrygians from the "EASTERN PART OF MACEDONIA". Sixth, the name "Makestes" is also a Greek word 'in plural form' meaning 'fighter, warrior' In singular it is "makestis".

Seventh, it says the language is of Doric Greek. So if the Greeks were not up north why would the script be in Doric Greek?? If it was going to be anything it would have been a dialect related to the Attic dialect or even the Achaen(Mycenaean dialect).

So everything this tablet claims shows that the DORIANS came from up north and not Thessaly in central Greece. So when most people say the Macedonians spoke a Doric dialect, this makes sense.

Eighth, "Any archaeologist you ask will tell you "PROVENIANCE" is the most important factor in archaeology. This is especially true when trying to establish the importance of an artifact or trying to use it as evidence." Without evidence there is no proof to show where the tablet was written or when it was written. It could very well be an old tablet that had other script added to it, just like the so called "James brother of Jesus" burial box. This was shown to have been inscribed at two vey different times, and the Provenace(the exact location where an artifact or cultural material was found) was unknown. It was later found that the owner was a forger who had faked many artifacts in order to make millions. So as you can see there are many problems with this tablet.

One final thing, did you not realize a big contradiction they stated?? First they state that the Greek Ministry of Culture refuses to issue a Private Ownership for the item. Then it says it is in safe keeping in Macedonia!! If it really exist then where is it?? Is it in Greece or is it in Macedonia?? Also if it is an actuall artifact why doesn't the Macedonian government invite the best western experts to come and evaluate the tablet to prove it's authenticity???? If it is in Macedonia then the Greek authorities can not hide it, like it is claimed. I have never seen anything published about it. If it is legitimate then there should have been professionial archaeologist and classicist publishing information in the scientific world on it. But there is nothing except on this site on the internet.

-- Anonymous, January 24, 2005


Perdikas son of Argeo(s) leading his Makestes (Macedonians) when approached to Vedissa (Edessa) citadel, headed down from upper Illyria, offered sacrifice to uppermost (god) Savaz(i)os. Then when conquered entire Midas country, being outraged with foreign Greeks who were charged for intrigues, extincted them immediatelly while released indigenous Briges (Phrygians) to wander away, because both these people spoke different languages. Since then being elder sovereign of Brigea (Phrygia) enjoyed the profits of this most ancient city renaming it to Aigai while kept repelling fugitives to return with excemption of captives. Dredas son of Gordios chiseled this marble chronicle in Greek language in memory of sorrowful remembrance.

This is an old writing discovered 4 years ago.very interesting James.For me it explains everything.I know you are going to neglect also this fact but what ever.

You are never going to agree with anything which has connection with Albanians or maybe Illyrians who are trying to "steal greek history and proud"

But here is the link and evidence which I think you should enjoy.

http://www.geocities.com/stojangr/

-- Anonymous, January 24, 2005


james i did't find any sentence "Molossians,Thesprotians, Chaones a Hellenic nation".Also the Colonies can't say that the territories are inhabited only by greeks.Greeks had colonies up to Egypt,Phrygia and so on but it doesn't mean that the population was greek.The colonies were inhabited by the local population and also by the colonists.Also Barbarian in that time I think meant just "non- greek".After the invasion of the Barbarians in the 6-7 centuries.Also the Illyrians and Thracians lived in cities but were called Barbarians.As I see from your references we have just villages and 2-3 colonies in Epirus(Chaonia, Molossia. Thesprotia).

Well my question is.

If Chaonia, Molossia, Thesprotia were Hellenic why Skylaks should say "And there we have a Hellenic city(or colony)" Couldn't he just say "the upper part of Hellas with the cities of .... and etc..etc.."

He wrote "The nation of Molottians, Chaones" SO HE WAS ABLE TO DISTINGUISH THE NON_GREEK NATIONS FROM THE GREEK ONES BUT MAYBE HE WAS NOT ABLE TO DISTINGUISH BETWEEN DIALECTS IN ILLYRIAN LANGUAGE.

-- Anonymous, January 24, 2005


Genti here is what Skylax has to say about the people who live on the Adriatic and Ionian coast. He lived in the 6th Century B.C.E. and was a Greek captain in the Persian navy. He Describes the people from the Straights of Gibraltar going east across Europe. But I will start at the northern coast of the Adriatic and end at the Gulf of Corinth.

"ILLYRIOI. And after Libyrnians are the Illyrian nation, and the Illyrians live along beside the sea as far AS CHAONIA BY KERKYRA, the island of Alkinoos. And there is a Hellenic city here, which has the name Herakleia, with a harbour. The barbarians called Lotus-Eaters are the following:Hierastamnai, Boulinoi,(Hyllinoi), coterminous with the Bulinoi the Hylloi. And these say Hyllos son of Herakles settled them: and they are barbarians. And they occupy a peninsula a little lesser than the Peloponnese. And from the peninsula 'Parastonion' is upright: Boulinoi live beside this. And the Boulinoi are an Illyric nation. And the coastal voyage is of the territory of Boulinoi of a long day up to Nestos river."

"NESTIANS. And from Nestou the voyage is gulf-shaped. And all this gulf is called Manios. And the coastal voyage is of one day. And these from one another are distant 2 stadia or a little more, by Pharos and Issa. For here is New Pharos, a Hellenic island, and Issa island, and these are Hellenic cities. Before sailing along the coast up to the Naron river, much territory extends very much into the sea. And there is an island near the coastal territory, and with the other promontory it comes down to the Naron river. And from Melite it is distant 20 stadia, and from the coastal territory it is distant 8 stadia."

MANIANS. And from Nestians is the Naron river: and the voyage into the Narona is not narrow: and even a trireme voyages into it, and boats into the upper trading town, being distant from the sea 80 stadia. And these are Illyrian by nation, the Manians. And there is a lake inland from the trading town, a great one, and the lake extends to Autariatai, an Illyric nation. And there is an island in the lake of 120 stadia: and this island is very much well farmed. And from this lake the Naron river flows. And from the Naron up to the Arion river is a day's voyage: and from the Arion river [up to the Rhizous river] a voyage of a day's half: and Kadmos's and Harmonia'a sones are here, and a snctuary [not] far from the Rhizous river. And from the Rhizous river to the Bouthoe the voyage ** and the trading town."

"ENCHELEIS. A nation of Illyrians are the Encheleis, adjoining the Rhizous. And out of Bouthoe to Epidamnus, Hellenic city, voyage of a day and a night, and a road three days."

TAULANTIOI. And of the Taulanians is the Illyric nation, in which epidamnos is, ans a river flows beside the city which is named Palamnos. And out of Epidamnos to Appolonia, a Hellenic city, is a road of two days. And Apollonia into Amantia is 320 stadia. And the Aias river from the Pindos mountain flows beside Apollonia. [And] towards [Amantia] inland, somewhat into the Ionian gulf is Orikos. It comes down from Orikia to the sea 90 stadia, and from Amantia 60 stadia. Sharing a border with all these in the interior are Atintanes above Orikia and Karia as far as Dodonia. And in the kestris territory is said to be a pedion, named Erytheia. Here Geryones is said to come and pasture his oxen. By these places are the Keraunian mountains in Epeiros, and there is an island beside these places, a small one, which has the name Sason. From here to Orikos is a coastal voyage of a day's third part."

ORIKOI. And the Orikoi occupy[...]of the Amanian territory. And the [Amantians], FROM BOULINOI AS FAR AS HERE, ARE ILLYRIANS. And the mouth of the Ionian gulf is from the Keraunian mountains as far as Iapygia. And up to Hydroeis city in Iapygia from the Keraunian mountains, the stades of the voyage across are about 500, [which] is the mouth of the gulf: and the places inside are the Ionian Gulf. There are many harbours in the Adriatic: and the same thing is the Adriatic and the Ionian."

"CHAONES. AND AFTER ILLYRIA, Chaonians. And Chaonia has good harbours: and the Chaonians live in villages. And the coastal voyage of Chaonia is a hafl of a day."

KORKYRA. And by Chaonia is an island, Korkyra, and a Hellenic city in it, having three harbours by the city: of these the one is enclosed. And Korkyra belongs to Thesprotia more than Chaonia. And I return again onto the mainland, whence I turned aside."

Thesprotians. And after Chaonia are the Thesprotians nation. And these too live in villages. And this territory also has good harbours. Here is a harbour, which has name Elaia"(olives in Greek) "Into this the harbour the river Acheron emits: and there is a lake Acherousia, out of which the Acheron river flows. And the coastal voyage of Thesprotia is a half of a day."

KASSOPIANS. And after Thesprotia is the nation Kassopia. And these too live in villages. And these live beside as far as into the Anaktoric gulf. And the coastal voyage of the Kassopian's territory is a half of a day; and the Anaktoric gulf is a little less from it's mouth as far as into the inner end, 120 stadia. And the mouth has width 4 stadia."

MOLOTTIA(I believe this was a mis-print and should be Mollosia)"And after Kassopia are the Molottian nation. And these live in villages: and they come down a little here to the sea, and largely into the interior. And the coastal voyage of Molottian territory is of 40 Stades."

"AMBRAKIA. And after Molottia, Ambrakia, a Hellenic city: and this is distant from sea 80 stadia. And there is also upon the sea a fort and an enclose harbour. FROM HERE HELLAS BEGINS TO BE CONTINUOUS AS FAR AS PENIOS river and Homolion, a city of Magnesian territory, which is beside the river. And the coastal voyage of Ambrakia is of 120 stades."

As you can see he describes the boundaries of where the Illyrians are and then describes the Epriot tribes. He says "from here Hellas begins to be 'continious'." This means it is all Hellene (Peloponnesian) land. The Hellene colonies of Illyria and Epirus are what constitutes "non-continuous". From what he describes there is a clear distinction between Illyria and Epirus and the Hellenic (Peloponnesian) people.

Remember what I said befroe about the definition of "Barbarian"? It can mean uncivilized or non-greek. In each of his descriptions he describes the Epirot tribes as "living in villages". This means according to Hellenes and Greeks(non Pelopponesian descent)that they are barbarous(non civilized) because they don't live in cities, but villages. Also there mode of subsistence is based on Pastoralism, (defined as a society where animal husbandry is regarded as the ideal way of making a living, and in which movement of all or part of the society is considered a normal and natural way of life.). This is in contrast with all the "civilized" Greeks and Hellenes, who lived in cities and city states and were agriculturalist.

I am curious as to "what" archaeological evidence you have that "proves that Macedonians were Illyian!!!

Now for Pyrrhus being sent to Glaukias instead of any other Greeks. There is some explanation found in the historical writings of why this was done. The story starts by saying Alcaeades supporters were going to take Pyrrhus to Macedonia originally, but there were a lot of problems along the way, and somehow ended up at Glaucias. I have read about Cassander whom Glaucias feared and was a mortal enemy of Alcaeas. Cassander was trying to gain control over Macedonia away from Polyperchon who was the successor of Antipaters(Alexanders diadochi regent). So I believe that the groups who helped overthrow Alcaeas(Pyrrhus's father) in Molossia were somehow supported by Cassander. And since Cassander was gaining control of Macedonia in 318 B.C.E(when Pyrrhus was a baby) the people placed in control of Pyrrhus may have changed their minds about going to Macedonia and instead go to Glaucias, who was an ally of Alcaeas.(I have read about an alliance somewhere but I cannot locate it.) I also just read an article that states Cassander was the leader of the revolt in Molossia.

I hope everything I posted has helped clear up the issue of Epirus not being Illyrian. And please post the "archaeologicl evidence" that you have.

James

-- Anonymous, January 23, 2005


Well at least Skylaks says "Down of ambracia was Hellas no end" He didn't say "Down of Via Egnatia was Hellas no end"Right?

About Pyrrhus you think he was raised by the Illyrian King and was Greek.When he was Greek how could he not be sent to Greek Kings but was sent to a barbarian tribe.?maybe it was coincidence again???

I have found very interesting archeological evidences which may convince you about the Macedonians.maybe it will end our discussion who knows

-- Anonymous, January 22, 2005


First let me define the word Barbarian. This term didn't only mean non-Greek, it also means uncivilized. Now keep that in mind when you read Thucydides and anyone else who uses that term. (I.E. which definition of the word barbarian is being used.)

1) Thucydides was an Athenian. He considered anyone who didn't live in a city-state barbarian, "which they have no king". He does say that they have prostats who are named 'Fotis' and 'Nicanores'(Both of these names are Greek).

The word Hellene does not mean all Greeks, but specific group which claim descent from Hellen(predominantly from the Peloponnese). The Romans called the Epiriots "Graeki". The Athenians, Thebans, Boeotians and Thessalian and other non-Peloponnesian groups were called Greeks.

So when Thucydides was saying "From the Hellenes" he is refering to the Peloponnesians.

As you can see from your next quote that describes their government systems. He says the Chaones and the Thesprotians have no king. Next he mentions the Molossians. He names Sabylintus and Tharypas(Both are Greek names).

Your next quote comes from Skylax which describes the inhabitant of the eastern Adriatic and Ionian seas. "In the north Adriatic live the Liburnians," This means around Croatia, Slovenia and Italy. He continues; "The middle of the south Adriatic sea is populated by Illyrians," This means the area of Montenegro and Albania.(The Adriatic ends at the tip of the heel of Italy and close to the southern part of Albania. Next "The Ionian sea is seperated by the Chaonians and Thesprotians," This means the area of the Southern part of Albania along the entire coast of western Greece until Lefkas, which is just north of the Gulf of Corinth. Next, "between them the Mollosians have opened and exit to the sea..." This means that the Mollosians were further east and inland closer to Thessaly. Next, "After Molossia it comes Ambracia and Hellenic Polis," Here he says Hellenic Polis (which means Peloponnesian). Finally he says "From there on down is Hellas with no end." This means all of the Peloponnese. he does not discuss the inland and further east.

2) You post on Pyrrhus. There is no side that says he wasn't raised by Glaucias. He may have been raised in Illyria, but does that make him Illyrian or Molossi(considering he was restored to the throne of Epirus.)??

3)Strabo writes from a much later time during the Roman period from around the end of the 1st century B.C.E and the beginning of the 1st century C.E. At this point Thessaly, Boeotia, Attica, and the entire Peloponnese are called Hellas. This no longer refers to just the groups who claim descent rom Hellen.

He says:"Starting from Epidamnos and down to Apollonia, on the right they have the tribes of Epirus...., and on the left they have the mountains of Illyria." Keep in mind he is traveling "East" so this turns the "North" into the "Left" and the "South" into the "Right". Epidamnus is in Illyria and Apollonia is in Epirus. There is no argument here. This is a clear boundary of what is Illyrian and what is Epiriot. Next he says: "After the Epirots and Illyrians, from the Hellenes are the Akarnanes, Etoles, Lokris, and Ezoles." These are the last areas that make contact with the Ionian Sea. They are primarily made up of Peloponnesians, but also other Greek groups.

Now remember Macedonia is still seperate from the rest of Hellas, because they have na empire, no city-states. They also claim descent from Heracles, not Hellen. So they are never mentioned in older times as Hellenes.

4)Your next source of Appianus has a mistake in it. It is supposed to say "The Greeks call those people Illyrian who occupy the region BEYOND Macedonia and Thrace, from Chaonia and Thesprotia to the river Ister(Danube). (This is taken from the Perseus Tufts site) This shows that the Illyrians lived beyond them not "across" them.

The "Ephores" you mention is it a person or is it one of Pausanias writings. "Ephores" are elected heads of council.

5)Malte Brun about Etolia and Akarnania. He doesn't take into consideration the different meanings of the word "Barbarian"

6)Strabo and Plutarch. The translations don't consider the other meaning of the word "Glossa" Which in modern and Byzantine times meant "tongue, language. But in classical and pre-calssical times it meant "dialect".

7)Poqueville, is writing around the 18th or 19th century when Albanians had already migrated further south into the rest of Epirus and Greece.

8)CH Brouchneri, he is talking about ALBANIA not ILLYRIA. There is a huge difference. He is writing after the Turkish period, just like Puqueville was. He is only basing it on the majority ethnic make-up of the region at that time, not what Illyria was or where it was in ancient times. He doesn't take into consideration the Greek populations living in Albania and the rest living in Epirus. He doesn't consider the Historical context either.

9)Theodor Mommsen is a Roman history expert, not Epiriot, Greek or Illyrian expert. He also wrote during a time when Epirus was under control of Albania, when a large number of Shqiptars lived in the region. Oh and when he said "Epiriots, Albanians(Shqiptars) of antiquity." Antiquity doesn't mean "ancient" it usually refers to early C.E and through the Middle Ages.

10)Laibnic says,"The language of the ancient Epiriot might exist somewhere in Epirus." This is just a brilliant statement. Imagine that the language of the Epiriots might exist in Epirus. Of course he never says what language it is!!!

11)Tunman: He is using assumptions. No where in Epirus or Macedonia is there anything written in anything other than GREEK! Also no one really knows what the ancient Illyrian language was. The only evidence is base on a few place-names only. Also he probably relies on the use of the term "Glossa" as meaning language instead of "Dialect".

12)P. Krecmer states: "All the groups of North Tribes, FROM the border of Epirus, at least from the time of Herodotus, had been called Illyrians, or Hyllirians which is more ancient." Actually "Wylliria" Because the word Illios was pronounced "Wyllios". Next, he NEVER said that Epirus was part of Illyria, only that it bordered with Illyria.

13)Edison Clark: He also bases his claims on the "Myth" or "Theory" that Macedonians spoke a different language. Once again there is absolutely no archaeological evidence which shows the Macedonians or the Epiriots spoke anything else but Greek. All their inscriptions are in a "Glossa" dialect of "Doric" Greek. Not Attic which would have been the dailect of the Colonist who built cities there. If they would have been influenced by the Colonist then they would have adopted the Attic dialect not vice-versa!!!!!!!!!!!!

Wait, I just realized you got a posting off of "EZ Boards". You are using what they post as fact. You really need to go to the university library and look a lot of this information up on your own. I just ordered Strabos' book Vol.8-10 which describes Epirus, Macedonia, Illyria and the other Greek regions. So I will post more by him in the next several weeks.

Also I will respond to your Mythology logic next time.



-- Anonymous, January 22, 2005


Some facts that Epius was not greek until 1945

The Name Of Epirus Was Given by the Hellenes.

It Was Given By The "Corcyrians" in Corfu wich is probably reasonable to give that name,because the land accross them was "Epirus" as they were in an Island.

The region of epirus by most of the facts that ancient historians have given to us seems to be a non greek region:

1)"Thucydides" In his book (Peloponessian War) He discribes the Barbarian Allies of the Peloponessians.

"From the Hellenes there were the Ambraciots, Leucadians and 1000 Peloponessian hoplites."

"From the Barbarians there were: 1000 Chaones wich have no King but 2 Prostats for 1 year Fotis and Nikanores. The Chaones are joint by Thesprotes wich they to have no King. In the head of the Mollosians and the Atintanians was Sabylinthius wich was the tutor of King Tharypa (yet still a child). There were also the Parauej with ther King Oroides and 1000 Orestes."

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 Chaons and Thesprots.Between them The Mollosians have opened an exit to the sea wich is (40 stadia=8Km)." "After Mollosia it comes Ambracia an Hellenic Polis,which is (80 stadia) away from the sea" "From there and down is Hellas no end"

3)Plutarch - Pyrrhus In his Book it is said as i posted before

"From him Achilles came to have divine honours in Epirus, under the name of Aspetus, in the language of the country" Aspetus=Speito in Albanian and Fast in English.

Pyrrhus was brought at the home of the Illyrian King Glaucias:

"Thus being safe, and out of the reach of pursuit, they addressed themselves to Glaucias, then King of the Illyrians,and finding him sitting at home with his wife, they laid down the child before them."

He was rised as an Illyrian Prince:

"At present, therefore, he gave Pyrrhus into the charge of his wife, commanding he should be brought up with his own children; and a little later, the enemies sending to demand him, and Cassander himself offering two hundred talents, he would not deliver him up; but when he was twelve years old, bringing him with an army into Epirus, made him king."

The Brotherhood between him and Glaucias sons: "He took a journey out of the kingdom to attend the marriage of one of Glaucias's sons, with whom he was brought up;"

Strabo:

He has writen about the passengers wich passes the Egnatia road:

"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 wich is in the East and across Peloponnesous are Hellenic.

Also he writes:

"After the Epirots and Illyrians, from the Hellenes are Akarnanes,Etoles,Lokries and Ezoles

Appianus:(Historia Romana)

In his book "Historia Romana" it is an article about the Illyrians:

"The Hellenes call Illyrians, those people wich live across Thrace and Macedonia from Chaones and Thesprotes till the river of Istria"

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

Malte Brun (Geographer from Danmark) Analised the Geography of Strabon, and came to concluson that Etolia and Akarnania, where considered by Ancient Greeks as Semi- Barbarians.

Strabo and Plutarchus they write that "Epirots speek a different language from the Greek" it resembles very much to Macedonian"

Puqueville: when he speaks about Etolia and Akarnania, he sais that: these places are called Shqiperia, and the inhabitants where called Shqiptar (Albanian)

Ch.Brouchneri (Geographer of the king of England) Albania(Shqiperia) is a province of European Turkey, In north it borders with Bosnia and Dalmatia, In south whith Livadhia,in East with Thesalia and Macedonia

Teodor Momsen (Historian)

In his Book: (History of Ancient Rome). he calls the Epirotians, Albanians(Shqiptars) of antiquety

Laibnic (German Mathemtician the so called Aristotles of modern times)

in his letter sent in 24 January 1705, he writes that "The Language of Ancient Epirots maight exist somewere in Epirus" the same believes and

J.E.Tunman: In Epirus lived only non-greeks populations, they spoke Macedonian which is the same with illyrian.the same believes and F.Bop, J.R.F.Ksilander, J.G.F.Han, J.F.Falmerajer , T.Mommsen

P.Krecmer He sais that: All the group of North Tribes, from the borders of Epirus, at least from the times of Herodotus, had been called Illyrians, or Hyllirians which is more ancient.

Edison L.Clark He writes : Albanians, Arnauts as the turks calls them, or Shqiptars, live in the territory of ancient Epirus and in the territory of Illyrians in East Macedonia. From Montenegro(North) till the Ambracian Golf (South). He continues : Ancient Epirots are different from Ancient Greeks, like Albanians from todays Greeks.Epirots and Illyrians where neighbour tribes , but of the same blood, which spoke different dialects of the same language.

to be continued........

-- Anonymous, January 22, 2005


75 AD

PYRRHUS

365?-272 B.C.

by Plutarch

translated by John Dryden

PYRRHUS -

OF the Thesprotians and Molossians after the great inundation, the first king, according to some historians, was Phaethon, one of those who came into Epirus with Pelasgus. Others tell us that Deucalion and Pyrrha, having set up the worship of Jupiter at Dodona, settled there among the Molossians. In after time, Neoptolemus, Achilles's son, planting a colony, possessed these parts himself, and left a succession of kings, who, after him, was named Pyrrhidae, as he in his youth was called Pyrrhus, and of his legitimate children, one was born of Lanassa, daughter of Cleodaeus, Hyllus's son, had also that name. From him Achilles came to have divine honours in Epirus, under the name of Aspetus, in the language of the country. After these first kings, those of the following intervening times becoming barbarous, and insignificant both in their power and their lives, Tharrhypas is said to have been the first who, by introducing Greek manners and learning, and humane laws into his cities, left any fame of himself. Alcetas was the son of Tharrhypas, Arybas of Alcetas, and of Arybas and Troas his queen, Aeacides; he married Phthia, the daughter of Menon, the Thessalian, a man of note at the time of the Lamiac war, and of highest command in the confederate army next to Leosthenes. To Aeacides were born of Phthia, Deidamia and Troas, daughters, and Pyrrhus, a son.

The Molossians, afterwards falling into factions and expelling Aeacides, brought in the sons of Neoptolemus, and such friends of Aeacides as they could take were all cut off; Pyrrhus, yet an infant, and searched for by the enemy, had been stolen away and carried off by Androclides and Angelus; who, however, being obliged to take with them a few servants, and women to nurse the child, were much impeded and retarded in their flight, and when they were now overtaken, they delivered the infant to Androcleon, Hippias, and Neander, faithful and able young fellows, giving them in charge to make for Megara, a town of Macedon, with all their might, while they themselves, partly by entreaty, and partly by force, stopped the course of the pursuers till late in the evening. At last, having hardly forced them back, they joined those who had the care of Pyrrhus; but the sun being already set, at the point of attaining their object they suddenly found themselves cut off from it. For on reaching the river that runs by the city they found it looking formidable and rough, and endeavouring to pass over, they discovered it was not fordable; late rains having heightened the water and made the current violent. The darkness of the night added to the horror of all, so that they durst not venture of themselves to carry over the child and the women that attended it; but, perceiving some of the country people on the other side, they desired them to assist their passage, and showed them Pyrrhus, calling out aloud, and importuning them. They, however, could not hear for the noise and roaring of the water. Thus time was spent while those called out, and the others did not understand what was said, till one recollecting himself, stripped off a piece of bark from an oak, and wrote on it with the tongue of a buckle, stating the necessities and the fortunes of the child, and then rolling it about a stone, which was made use of to give force to the motion, threw it over to the other side, or, as some say, fastened it to the end of a javelin, and darted it over. When the men on the other shore read what was on the bark, and saw how time pressed, without delay they cut down some trees, and lashing them together, came over to them. And it so fell out, that he who first got ashore, and took Pyrrhus in his arms, was named Achilles, the rest being helped over by others as they came to hand.

Thus being safe, and out of the reach of pursuit, they addressed themselves to Glaucias, then King of the Illyrians, and finding him sitting at home with his wife, they laid down the child before them. The king began to weigh the matter, fearing Cassander, who was a mortal enemy of Aeacides, and, being in deep consideration, said nothing for a long time; while Pyrrhus, crawling about on the ground, gradually got near and laid hold with his hand upon the king's robe, and so helping himself upon his feet against the knees of Glaucias first moved laughter, and then pity, as a little, humble, crying petitioner. Some say he did not throw himself before Glaucias, but catching hold of an altar of the gods, and spreading his hands about it, raised himself up by that; and that Glaucias took the act as an omen. At present, therefore, he gave Pyrrhus into the charge of his wife, commanding he should be brought up with his own children; and a little later, the enemies sending to demand him, and Cassander himself offering two hundred talents, he would not deliver him up; but when he was twelve years old, bringing him with an army into Epirus, made him king. Pyrrhus in the air of his face had something more of the terrors than of the augustness of kingly power; he had not a regular set of upper teeth, but in the place of them one continued bone, with small lines marked on it, resembling the divisions of a row of teeth. It was a general belief he could cure the spleen by sacrificing a white cock and gently pressing with his right foot on the spleen of the persons as they lay down on their backs, nor was any one so poor or inconsiderable as not to be welcome, if he desired it, to the benefit of his touch. He accepted the cock for the sacrifice as a reward, and was always much pleased with the present. The large toe of that foot was said to have a divine virtue; for after his death, the rest of the body being consumed, this was found unhurt, and untouched by the fire. But of these things hereafter.

Being now about seventeen years old, and the government in appearance well settled, he took a journey out of the kingdom to attend the marriage of one of Glaucias's sons, with whom he was brought up; upon which opportunity the Molossians again rebelling, turned out all of his party, plundered his property, and gave themselves up to Neoptolemus. Pyrrhus having thus lost the kingdom, and being in want of all things, applied to Demetrius, the son of Antigonus, the husband of his sister Deidamia, who, while she was but a child, had been in name the wife of Alexander, son of Roxana, but their affairs afterwards proving unfortunate, when she came to age, Demetrius married her. At the great battle of Ipsus, where so many kings were engaged, Pyrrhus, taking part with Demetrius, though

You see Pyrrhus of Epir was raised from the king of the Illyrians Glaucia not by any Greek King.He put back Pyrrhus to his throne when he grew up.And probably you will notice that Pyrrhus maybe had sth to do with the Illyrian Language.

Is my source correct?????

-- Anonymous, January 22, 2005


Well James I see that you look too much to Mythology as History.But you forget sth that according to Mythology recorded we have

Appian, Illyr. 2.3–4:

“It is said that the country received its name from Polyphemus' son Illyrius; the Cyclops Polyphemus and Galatea had the sons Celtus, Illyrius and Galas; they left Sicily and ruled over the peoples who were named after them: the Celts, the Illyrians, and the Galatians. This mythological story pleases me the most, although many others are also told by many writers. (4) Illyrius had the sons Encheleus, Autarieus, Dardanus, Maedus, Taulas, Perrhaebus and the daughters Partho, Daortho, Dassaro and others, from whom arose the peoples of the Taulantii, Perrhaebi, Enchelei, Autariatae, Dardanians [and Maedi], Partheni, Dassaretii and Darsi. Autarieus himself had a son Pannonius or Paeon, who in turn had Scordiscus and Triballus, from whom nations also were descended who were named after them. But I shall leave this subject to the antiquarians.”

Now it is obvious that WE ARE ALL GREEK.The Illyrians were Greek, the Gauls were Greek also the Celts because that's how Mythology says.

Right James? Do you agree with me that according to your Logic all the nations evolved from the son,nephews of Cadmus and Harmonia (WHO WERE GREEK) were Greek.But Herodotus who was the first to distinguish between History and Mythology thought that the Illyrians were not hellenic,the Celts were not Hellenic.And his opinion was right.

So my point his that the Molossians could have not be descendant from the semi-god Achilles and his son Pyrrhus because its not- logical.

Well Mythology reveals us some Myths and we now that Myths have a based truth but we cannot count too much on it because I think that the oral translation in centuries before being written down (first time from Homer) is not integral.

Well unless you believe that the Gods of Olympus really existed.

-- Anonymous, January 22, 2005


Even though that one article said that the Macedonians are Illyrian, there is nothing else in any of the articles that states or supports that idea. Here is what is said about Macedonia from the earliest times.

" Occupied continuously since early Neolithic times, Macedonia possessed a distinctive culture in the Bronze Age, which was affected by Mycenaean civilization. After c. 1150 B.C. Macedonia entered a dark age. The nucleus of the Classical Macedonians was perhaps formed by the peoples called Macedoni who came from southwestern Macedonia. The tribes of upper Macedonia, however, were most likely composed of Greek, Illyrian and Thracian people who began moving into the region in the centuries following the Dorian invasion."

It wasn't until a much later time that the northern parts made up of Greek, Illyrian and Thracians was made part of the Kingdom of Macedonia. From the article: "Until the fourth century B.C. when Philip II incorporated Northern Macedonia,..."

So if the Northern(upper) area wasn't annexed until the 4th century, then that means the rest of the Macedonians were not Illyrian. Phillip and Alexander and the rest of the Argaeads are from Aigai and Pella, which are both located in the central and southern parts of Macedonia. You have to keep in mind that the region originally known as Macedonia was much smaller and didn't reach as far to the north than what was later to be known as "Macedonia" during the reign of Phillip through the Romans, Byzantines and Ottomans until today.

Look at any map that shows Macedonia before Phillips conquest and you will see there was more territory added to it later reaching further north, west and east. Furthermore, there was the Pindos mountain range that seperated the two people. Mountains and rivers were usually natural boundaries seperating different ethnic and linguistic groups from one another. This doesn't mean that no contact was present but it was usually not enough to change the make-up of a group.

-- Anonymous, January 22, 2005


The article NEVER said that they were the same, but resembled. Read this part of the article;

"Some of the tribes however were closely related to the Greeks, and may be looked upon as semi-Hellenic."

":and accordingly Herodotus places the Thesprotians in Hellas (ii; 56), and mentions the Molossian Alcon among the Hellenic suitors of Agarista (vi. 127). It would appear that towards the north the Epirots became blended with the Macedonians and Illyrians, and towards the south with the Hellenes."

As you can see it really depended on where in Epirus the tribe was from, which decided which group they were closest related to.

This next part discusses the geneaology of the Mollosians starting with Neoptolemos.

"(Neoptolemos, also called Pyrrhus; i. e. the ruddy). (1) The son of Achilles and Deïdamia. He was brought up by his grandfather Lycomedes in Scyros. After Achilles' death, however, he was led by Odysseus to Troy, since, according to the prophecy of Helenus, that town could be taken only by a descendant of Aeacus. Here, like his father, he distinguished himself above all by a courage which none could withstand. He slew Eurypylus, son of Telephus, and was one of the heroes in the wooden horse, where he alone remained undaunted. Later legend depicts him as fierce and cruel: at the taking of Troy he killed the aged Priam at the altar of Zeus, hurled Hector's son, Astyanax, down from the walls, and offered up Polyxena upon his father's tomb. In Homer he arrives safely with much booty at Phthia, his father's home, and weds Menelaüs's daughter Hermioné, who was promised him during the siege of Troy ( Od.iv. 5). Later legend represents him as accompanied by Andromaché, Hector's wife, who is allotted him as a part of his booty, and Helenus, and then, on the strength of a prophecy of Helenus, as going to Epirus and settling there. It was to a son of his by Lanassa, granddaughter of Heracles, that the later kings of Epirus traced back their descent, and accordingly styled themselves Aeacidae; while from his son by Andromaché, Molossus, the district of Molossia was said to derive its name (Pausan. i. 11). He afterwards went to Phthia, to reinstate his grandfather Peleus in his kingdom whence he had been expelled by Acastus and wedded Hermioné. He soon, however, met his death at Delphi, whither, according to one story, he had gone with dedicatory offerings, or, according to another, to plunder the temple of Apollo in revenge for his father's death. The accounts of his death vary, some attributing it to Orestes, the earlier lover of Hermioné; others to the Delphians, at the instance of the Pythian priestess; others again to a quarrel about the meat-offerings. The scene of his death was the altar, a coincidence which was regarded as a judgment for his murder of Priam. His tomb was within the precincts of the Delphic temple, and in later times he was worshipped as a hero with annual sacrifices by the Delphians, as he was said to have vouchsafed valuable assistance against the Gauls when they threatened the sacred spot (B.C. 279) (Pausan. x. 23)."

As you can see from this one article the Mollosians are of Greek descent. There founder was one of the Greeks who went and destroyed Troy.

So it may be that some of the tribes of Epirus were mixed with the Illyrians, but the Mollosians and the Thesprotians are Greek. It also never says that the Epiriots were Illyrian , so to claim ALL OF THEM as Illyrian, is a false statement. You should at least accept this about the Mollosians and the Thesprotians as being Greek as far back as 1200 B.C.E.

We will debate the Macedonian issue later.

-- Anonymous, January 21, 2005


Yes I read your response to my post but it is hard to judge a study made by too many people.As you read there were not just Illyrian and Greek Myths studied but from all the nations like:Korean, Chinese et..etc.. and the sudy was a collaboration between English and Albanian historian and linguists.

Well I knew you were going to response in a manner of disagreement because it never happened before between our posts.

But from the posts of Herodotus you referred to me I realized and understood that Epirus was not Greek until their arrival but I never found a post of herodotus or sb else that states "The Epirots were GREEK or Hellenic tribe escpescially the molossians and chaons.

You didn't even share with me your opinion about the post of that historian I found on TUFTS university site as you wrote before "You will see was the world academia believes about Epirus. Enjoy the article, and I will also post a lot of information by Herodotus that supports much of what they said. Tufts University is one of the best Historical and Ancient studies schools in the world. So there is no bias and no propoganda"

He stated that The epirots were very similar to the Macedonians (Hair cut,customs) who where an Illyrian tribe (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) rather than to Greeks.

I also hate to dissapoint you James.

-- Anonymous, January 21, 2005


Genti pleae look under the question of (Alexander the Great is Albanian'continued') for my response to that essay you posted.

-- Anonymous, January 20, 2005

I find it very strange that they call the Macedonians an Illyrian race in that article, but there is no other article on Macedonia that says that. The closest anything comes to that is in this article from the site.

"Occupied continuously since early Neolithic times, Macedonia possessed a distinctive culture in the Bronze Age, which was affected by Mycenaean civilization. After c. 1150 B.C. Macedonia entered a dark age. The nucleus of the Classical Macedonians was perhaps formed by the peoples called Macedoni who came from southwestern Macedonia. The tribes of upper Macedonia, however, were most likely composed of Greek, Illyrian and Thracian people who began moving into the region in the centuries following the Dorian invasion. Until the fourth century B.C. when Philip II incorporated Northern Macedonia, and annexed the Strymon valley and Chalcidice, Macedonia was divided and there was a constant struggle between the semi-independent principalities. After Philip's unification, Macedonia became a state with great economic and military strength ruled by Phillip's son, Alexander the Great, and a succession of monarchs until the Roman conquest."

Here it says that the "Upper Macedonians" were of a mixed Greek, Illyrian and Thracian, descent. But he says the Macedoni are from the "southwest". So think about this description of the Northern Macedonians; If Illyrian were to the west and Thracians to the east then the Greeks are in the middle and to the south. This would mean that when they say the Makedoni came from the southwest, it means south of Illyria and the western and northern parts of Greece. Thus the Makedoni are Greeks.

That means they either came from the western part of Thessaly or the Southern part of Epirus, or the Northern part of Acarnania. All these were parts of Pelasgia and Greece, whom later became the "Greeks" The term Greek came from the Latins "Graikoi" which was one of the ancient tribes of Epirus. This word is older than the term "Hellenes". So the Greeks got their name from an Epiriot tribe, who are also part fo what later made up the "Hellenic" people or "Greeks".

For what happened to the Pelasgians read my quote #5.

"For just at the same time when the Athenians were assuming Hellenic nationality, the Pelasgians joined them, and thus first came to be regarded as Greeks."

Also read #4 where it states: "I believe myself that the Greek people have always spoken the same language, but they were weak after the seperation from the Pelasgians of whom TEHY WERE A BRANCH, and have since grown fom small beginnings from their present numbers by the addition of various foreign elements, amongst which were the Pelasgians themselves."

The time frame that Herodotus is speaking about is around the Mycenaean period or possibly even earlier. So what do you think is the make up of people that were called Greeks during ancient times???

Now for Epirus, what did the articles say about the Thesprotian and the Mollosians? They claim to be descendants of Achaens. So this would mean that they are also Greek. So knowing that they are descendants of Greeks(Generic term) that means that Olympias was Greek. Nothing points to them being Illyrian. Pelasgian, Yes, Greek, Yes, Illyrian, No.

The Greeks were never just one singular group of people. They were an admixture of several groups. Everything Herodotus says about the Pelasgians shows that they became part of what was at a later period called "Greeks" or "Hellenes".

Now for a connection to the names in Illyrian. We have been over this before. They were borrowed it from the Greeks!! Since the Pelasgian and other Greek groups dominated the peninsula, anyone near them or did trade with them or even mixed with them would have adopted, (or used the names to describe something related to them) ,the names of the gods and the cult heroes. There is nothing mysterious about it, a dominant culture always influences the groups around them or in contact with them.

So to summarize; the Pelasgians mixed with other groups to become what was later know as the "Hellenes" and "Greeks". Before them there were only loosely organized groups. They later due to trade inter-marriage, etc. became one group of people who spoke various forms of Greek. The different groups are the Dorians, Achaeans, Ionians and the Pelasgians. So the Greeks were from a very early date a conglomeration of these different groups, who adopted and modified each of their distinct cultures and mythology to form what was later to be known as "Greek Mythology". When thinking about what I just said refer to the quotes I gave you on Herodotus. It will all make sense. I do accept that the northern parts of Macedonia had some Illyrian blood and that the northern parts of Epirus had some Illyrian influences, but they were generally considered "Greek"(a generic term). The Mollosians were descended from returning Greeks from the Trojan war.



-- Anonymous, January 20, 2005


The Macedonians were not Illyrians nor were the people of Epirus, they were all Hellenic. Refer to the works of Herodutus he explains it all.

-- Anonymous, January 20, 2005

As I have read from your posts I have stated that Pelasgians were not Hellenic and mixed with the population of the Hellenic tribes.So the Pelasgians mixed with the Hellenic or the Hellenic mixed with the Pelasgians.I see a little difference because the undeveloped tribes called as Dorians,Acheans, and Ionians had after a while such a revolution in their customs and culture.If the Greek tribes were highly civilized and had their "GODS" why would they borow the main GOD Zeus from the Pelasgians?Because they did't have any.Well I think that they adopted more than Zeus who already had a temple in Dodona and was not the only God adopted from Hellenic tribes because is unlogical to think that a Tribe who built a temple for the Main GOD had just one of them when the Historians refer to this period of history as PAGANISM where a lot of Gods were worshiped.The same thing for the Pelasgians who inhabited Epir is that they had more GODS related to Zeus. Now I want to say that according to Mythology Zeus killed Cronos his father and saved his brothers and sisters(I am not sure but the main 12 gods of Olympus)

So I think this CULT was before developed until Greeks arrived and was not developed after their arrival.

Or this Logic: The Hellenic tribes arrived found in that area the Pelasgians.Just borrowed THE NAME ZEUS and very quickly invented a dozen of "GREEK GODS".

Or this Logic: The Greeks and The Pelasgians worshiped Zeus at the same time in different goegraphical locations.The first one in the Caucasus and the second one in Epirus without hearing about each other.And then when Greeks arrived to Peloponese they saw some people having the same customs and mythology and said "Sorry but we miss just Zeus the main GOD who seats at Olympus here somewhere.We have all the other GODS just like yours but we need to adopt him It's fit so good in our Mythology than in your.Strange but true"

Well it's also strange that some of this names can be explained in Greek's neibougher's Language.Just one I could name it as Coincidence,The second one as coincidence but the fifth one the seventh and so on can't be a coincidence James.

So we have Pelasgian Gods which can be explained in a very strange connection with Albanian Language.Explain me James how it can be possible?????

As for the Thesprotians, Chaonians and Molossians no greek source mentions about them as Hellenic Tribes.I can agree they were hellenized but I can't agree with you about they greek heritage.

Please remeber that the word APPEARED in historical studies doesn't mean ARRIVED from somewhere.

-- Anonymous, January 20, 2005


Epīrus (Êpeiros). A country to the west of Thessaly, lying along the Adriatic. The Greek term, which answers to the English word mainland, appears to have been applied at a very early period to that northwestern portion of Greece which is situated between the chain of Pindus and the Ionian Gulf and between the Ceraunian Mountains and the river Acheloüs--this name being probably used to distinguish it from the large, populous, and wealthy island of Corcyra, which lay opposite to the coast. It appears that, in very ancient times, Acarnania was also included in the term, and in that case the name must have been used in opposition to all the islands lying along the coast ( Homer Od.xiv. 100).

The inhabitants of Epirus were scarcely considered Hellenic. The population in early times had been Pelasgic. The oracle at Dodona was always called Pelasgic, and many names of places in Epirus were also borne by the Pelasgic cities of the opposite coast of Italy. But irruptions of Illyrians had barbarized the whole nation; and though Herodotus speaks of Thesprotia as a part of Hellas, he refers rather to its old condition, when it was a celebrated seat of the Pelasgians, than to its state at the time when he wrote his history. In their mode of cutting the hair, in their costume, and in their language, the Epirotes resembled the Macedonians, who were an Illyrian race. Theopompus, cited by Strabo, divided the inhabitants of Epirus into fourteen different tribes, of which the most renowned were the Chaonians, Thesprotians, and Molossians. The Molossians claimed descent from Molossus, son of Neoptolemus and Andromaché. Tradition reported that the son of Achilles, Neoptolemus or Pyrrhus, as he is also called, having crossed from Thessaly into Epirus on his return from the siege of Troy, was induced, by the advice of an oracle, to settle in the latter country, where, having subjugated a considerable extent of territory, he transmitted his newly formed kingdom to Molossus, his son by Andromaché, from whom his subjects derived the name of Molossi.

I found this in perseus.edu check yourself James the tufts university writes about what Herodotus "was talking about" Also about what the Historian thinks of the Macedonian people I thought you almost conviced me.

-- Anonymous, January 20, 2005


Keep in mind that these are translations of original works. Oh, I almost forgot while you are on the Perseus site please look up what it says about Neoptolemos. You will see that Mollosus was his grandson. Here is the address: http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?doc=Perseus%3Atext% 3A1999.04.0062%3Aid%3Dneoptolemus

Here is another translation from Pausanias 'Descriptions of Greece.'This discusses many things including Epirus, Pyrrhus and Illyrians. http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?lookup=Paus%2e+4%2e35%2e6

-- Anonymous, January 20, 2005


Here are several quotes from Herodotus "Histories"

1)Book I, pg.18 About Croesus

"With this purpose in view he at once prepared to try out the oracles and sent to Delphi, to Abae in Phocis, to Dodona, to the oracles of Amphiaraus and Trophinius, and to Branchidae in Milesia. These WERE THE GREEK ONES which he consulted, but, not content with them he sent also to the oracle of Ammon in Libya."

To Cyrus on which Greek states are the strongest.

2)Book I, pg.21

"His inquiries revealed that the Lacadaemonians were the most ancient of the Dorian peoples and the Athenians of the Ionian. These two people, one originally Pelasgian and other Hellenic, were the most powerful of the Greek people. The Ionians are an Indigenous race, but the Dorians on the contrary have been constantly on the move; Their home in Deucalion's reign was Pthiotis and in the reign of Dorus son of Hellen the country known as Histiaeotis in the neighborhood of Ossa and Olympus; driven from there by the Cadmeians they settled in Pindus and were known as Macedonians; Thence they migrated to Dryopis and finally to the Peloponnese, where they got their present name of Dorians."

3)pg.22

"...also from the language of the Pelasgian people who settled at Placia and Scylace on the Hellespont and were fellow country men of the Athenians, and of the other Pelasgian towns which have since changed their names. Granted, then, that these are a fair sample of the Pelasgian race, one may conclude that the Athenians, being themselves Pelasgians, changed their language when they were absorbed into the Greek family of nations."

4) same paragraph

"I believe myself that the Greek people have always spoken the same language, but they were weak after the seperation from the Pelasgians of whom they were a branch, and have since grown from small beginnings to their present numbers by the addition of various foreign elements, amongst which were the Pelasgians themselves."

5)Book II, pg.105

"For just at the same time when the Athenians were assuming Hellenic nationality, the Pelasgians joined them, and thus first came to be regarded as Greeks."

6)pg. 106

"In ancient times , as I know from what I was told at Dodona, the Pelasgians offered sacrifices of all kinds, and prayed to the gods, but without any distinction of name or title - for they had not yet heard of any such thing. They called the gods by the Greek word 'theoi' -disposers- because they had 'disposed' and arranged everything in due order, and assigned each thing to it's proper division."

7)Same paragraph

"About the oracles - that of Dodona in Greece and of Ammon in Libya- ..." "...according to the priests of the Theban Zues."

8)pg.107

"The people who gave me this information were the three priestesses at Dodona - Promeneia the eldest, Timarete the next, and Nicandra the youngest - and their account is confirmed by the other Dodoneians connected with the temple. Personally, however, I would suggest that if the Phoenicians really carried off the women from the temple and sold them respectively in Libya and Greece, the one who was brought to Greece (or Pelasgia as it was then called) must have been sold to the Thesprotians; and later, while she was working as a slave in THAT PART OF THE COUNTRY,...when she had learned to SPEAK GREEK,..."

9)Book II pg.149

"I may say, for instance, that it was the daughters of Danaus who brought theis ceremony from Egypt and instucted the Pelasgian women in it, and that after the Dorian conquest of the Peloponnese it was lost; only the Arcadians, who were not driven from their homes by invaders, continued the celebration of it."

10)Book VII, pg.401

"The Dorians contributed 100.Their equipment was Greek. These people, according to the Greek accounts, as long as they had lived in what is now known as Achaea in the Peloponnese, before the coming of the Dorians and Xuthus, were called Pelasgians of the Coast. They took their present name from the Xuthus' son Ion. The islanders -also wearing Greek armour - contributed 17. They, too, are a Pelasgian people; they were later known as Ionians for the same reason as those who inhabited the twelve cities founded from Athens. The Aeolians (also, as the Greeks suppose, originally a Pelasgian people) contributed 60."

11)Book VII, pg.430

"A wall was once built across the passage, and there used long ago to be a getaway in it; both were constructed by the Phocians in fear of an invasion from Thessaly, at the period when the Thessalians came from Thesprotis to settle in the country of Aeolis, which they still occupy."

12) Book VIII, pg.463

"When what is now called Greece was occupied by the Pelasgians, the Athenians, a Pelasgian people, were called Cranai. In the reign of Cecrops they acquired the name of Cecropidae. At the succession of Erectheus they changed their name to Athenians; and when Ion, the son of Xuthus, became general of their armies, they took from him the title of Ionians."

Against Persia

13)Book VIII, pg.464

"The Styreans and Cythians are Dryopes. Seriphus, Siphorus, and Melos also took part - they were the only islands not to make their submission to Persia. All these states are situated on the side of the river Acheron and the country of the Thesprotians, who are neighbors of the people of Ambracia and Leucas - the two most distant places to contribute to the fleet. Beyond them, there was only one community -Croton- which helped Greece in her hour of danger; the Crotoniats sent one ship, under the command of Phyllus, a man who had won three victories at the Pythian games. The Crotoniats are of Achaen blood."

If you read the Perseus Tufts listing and combine it with Herodotus, then you will see that the Epririots are primarily a Greek people from early on. Further more the Pelasgians mixed with the Greek speaking populations well before the time of Mycenae and they make up one of the groups who were later known as the 'GREEKS'. The 3 groups are the 1)Pelasgians 2)Achaens 3)Dorians So before Greeks became known as Greeks there were the 1)Dorians, the sons of Hellen. 2) Achaens, the Mycenaeans. 3)The Pelasgian, who were the original inhabitants who mixed with the other two groups. The best known of them are the Athenians. So as you can see the Greeks are the Pelasgians. There is some info that leads me to think that the Mycenaeans are the Pelasgians because almost every place that is mentioned to be Pelasgian has a Mycenaean settlement there. The most notable Athens.

Here is a map they have of Ancient Greece. It doesn't include any other groups, except for the region of Greek descent. http://www.pereus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/image?lookup=1999.04.0062.fig00782

I would really like to hear your remarks on this.

I hate to dissapoint you.



-- Anonymous, January 19, 2005


Moderation questions? read the FAQ