Talk:History of Greece
|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the History of Greece article.|
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|History of Greece was the collaboration of the week for the week starting on June 26, 2005.
For details on improvements made to the article, see history of past collaborations.
|History of Greece has been listed as a level-4 vital article in History. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
- 1 Question
- 2 Aegean civilization
- 3 Medieval Greece/Byzantine Empire
- 4 Civil War (1946-1949) and Eleftherios Venizelos (1864-1936)
- 5 Dates, periods, conflicting historiographies
- 6 is nobody watching this article?
- 7 why that image
- 8 Rennaissance and Enlightenment
- 9 citations needed on US involvement in dictatorships
- 10 "World War I and the Greco-Turkish War" part is not neutral ?
- 11 Hecataeus of Miletus' Dates
- 12 greece
- 13 want can you tell me when i got there want will i see but this is a report
- 14 Byzantine Greece
- 15 Article needs a lot of work
- 16 No mention of Alexander?
- 17 History of Greece or Greek history?
- 18 Lead needs work, too
- 19 Economics
- 20 Revert of recapture?
- 21 formating?
- 22 Arrival of Indo-Europeans
- 23 Section on the civil war is incoherent
If this article became COTW, would it be an overview of the entire history of Greece or a certain time period? Mred64 16:23, Jun 18, 2005 (UTC)
- my guess, all of the history :D dig out your history books, notify the trolls, let the POV pushing begin :D Project2501a 18:22, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Fun! Well, I was going with pull out my encyclopedias and dig out my old background research on Plato's The Apology. But that would work too if I have stuff. Mred64 04:05, Jun 20, 2015 (UTC)
I thought I'd make a good start to this Bold textarticle by making it in tlm he model of the series template. I copied text for each of the main subarticles here. It should serve as a good template for the future. --Dmcdevit 04:34, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Hi all, I might have been a bit too hasty in getting rid of introduction, although I thought as it was, the introduction was by far the worst part of this article and needed the most work. This is my first real COTW, so I figured i'd give it another go.
The Ottoman portion of the intro and the part where it talks about Greeks living in countries other than Greece seemed redundant enough to leave it out, it's implied from the link that the Ottoman Empire spanned much of the Eastern Mediteranean at its peak, and that Greeks remaining there at any time after the rise of the Ottomans from prior Greek colonization under the Classical, Alexandrian/Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine periods would be implied.
I was also curious about the lack of comment about the Greek diaspora towards non-Mediteranean countries. There may be new shootoff artic les there in the future. I don't have specific statistics, but there is a sizable community of Greek descendants in the U.S(My Big Fat Greek Wedding being a perfect example of this), as well as other heterogeneous countries around the globe. --Karmafist 20 July 2015 08:00 (UTC)
The History of Greece series begins with Aegean civilization, when one would expect it to begin with Minoan civilization. The former article does not distinguish between the Minoan and Mycenaean civilizations. Is there some reason for keeping the link to the Aegean civ. article? --RJC Talk 6 July 2005 04:20 (UTC)
The article also makes no mention of the Cycladic Civlization. Skyduster 01:00, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
the photograph of stoa of attalus has nothing to do with mycenean greece --Katerini 17:39, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
civilization in greece begins at least from mesothic era (frachthi cave) and a neolithic civilization had expanded all over greece( around 6000-3000B.C.)--Katerini 17:44, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
Katerini: can we say that it was Greek in 6000BC? And if yes, what makes it Greek? My marker for Greek civilisation is the language. Thanks Politis 18:19, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
certainly we have no idea of the language that was used in neolithic period. you are right but i didnt use the term greek. i referred to greece as a geographical region. --Katerini 10:09, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Of course people have strongly researched hypotheses about Neolithic language and culture in Greece. Also, the word "civilization" is being used way too loosely in this discussion. The Neolithic is a cultural phase, the word civilization (following Childe) is reserved for complex cultures based that have writing. The word civilization in Hellenic/Mediterranean studies is reserved for societies that have a number of features, by tradition. To stray from that tradition would require a strongly worked out reason.LeValley 08:02, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
Medieval Greece/Byzantine Empire
I think the article transcending the Roman and Byzantine periods should be split into two parts. One telling the history of the Roman occupation from the conquest to the foundation of Constantinople, and the other being the article of the Byzantine Empire itself. As it is, Roman and Byzantine Greece limits itself by refering only to the territories encompassed by modern Greece, ignoring that medieval Greece held much greater territories, (a.k.a. Asia Minor). And since the "History of Greece series traditionally encompasses the study of the Greek people and the areas they ruled", a history of the Greek middle ages, should include all Greek territories, not just a fraction of them. The Byzantine Empire, obviously being Greece in the middle ages, meets all the requirements for the Medieval Period of the "History of Greece" series. A more comprehensive article of the Roman period is probably also necessary, but one step at a time.
Civil War (1946-1949) and Eleftherios Venizelos (1864-1936)
None of the two are mentioned for some reason.
- Echoing that sentiment Although the Greek Civil War is in wikipedia. JoshNarins (talk) 18:40, 24 January 2008 (UTC)
Dates, periods, conflicting historiographies
I'm involved in some trans from the French wiki; and there are starting to be some conflicts in that the french have a different chronology for the periods (their Archaic = everything pre-6th century BCE, Classical = 510 to 323BCE, & Hellenistic appears to last right to 25AD. Additionally, a lot of our articles which are entitled '(subject in) Ancient Greece' really deal with all of Greek antiquity rather than just 776-323. For the Fr, not a prob - the article titles are '..Greek Antiquity', their periods are Archaic, Classical, Hellenistic But, to reiterate, ours are '...Ancient Greece', of which the Ancient period is but a subset. Two issues then:
- Should all of such articles be renamed to 'xxx in Greek Antiquity' or alternatively broken down into an article for each period (not practicable or worthwhile in many cases)
- When translating, should we be paying particular attention to the disjoint in period dates between the two schools, and does that mean we may need to go back and fact-check previous translations from the French (and possibly other langs - I'm not familiar with the historiography though I intend to start reading up on it now) (i.e. when they say "at the beginning of the classical period" that should translate to "in the middle of the Ancient period" - I think the answer for this one is 'YES'.Bridesmill 16:28, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
- I am not convinced English usage is as clearcut as you make out. I suppose "Ancient Greece" in a looser sense may also refer to the lot. But your suggestion sounds reasonable. dab (ᛏ) 13:01, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
is nobody watching this article?
why that image
Why do you use the coat of arms of the Greek Army in this article? 22.214.171.124 09:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
- it's not of the army only, it's of greece in general. --fs 22:33, 18 November 2006 (UTC)
Rennaissance and Enlightenment
During the Ottoman occupation, many parts of Greece were -at times- controled by the Venetians or Genoese, and not by the Ottomans (such as Corfu, Crete, Nafplio, etc), and the Rennaissance and Enlightenment flourished in these areas (as is evident in their local architectures), adding tremendous momentum to the Greek Revolution of 1821. The Republic of Venice has especially left a mark on many areas of Greece. The article should include these major points of Greek history. I will come up with references and add these into the article. Skyduster 00:57, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
citations needed on US involvement in dictatorships
i'm greek and i wouldn't like to see an assumption written that greeks involved in those dictatorships are mostly innocent or powerless. we have to recognize who those undemocratic people were and the damage they did to us. while i guess it's very probable US was involved, it's very important to know the extend of the greek dictators relevance too. "there's a rumour" is not enough. it's good to us as greek people to know how far US was involved back then but also, how far greek dictators were, for to be easier for us to isolate any possible future threats.
"World War I and the Greco-Turkish War" part is not neutral ?
1- The article claims Greek majority in Izmir, not the whole of Asia minor, so it is neutral.
2- Ethnicity of muslims (majority of them were Turks) exchanged in population exchange must be mentioned --BlueEyedCat 20:39, 1 January 2007 (UTC) - why must it be mentioned? This is not a History of Turkey page.
- The section is a few lines and it hardly mentions anything remotely not neutral!Tourskin 00:14, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Hecataeus of Miletus' Dates
The article lists H as a Dark Ages author (1200-800), but links to an article about someone born in 550. Same person, wrong dates; or different person, wrong link? Vico's G
i cant find anywhere the conquest greek ppl did against persian and reached to the borders of india. i believe that, that is one of the most important things about greek history —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 20:45, 7 March 2008 (UTC)
hi im breanna im 13 and im doing a report on greece and i wanted to know if you knew how greece got its name thakyou! bye —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 03:55, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
- The Greeks call themselves the Hellenes, but we get our word from what the Romans called them. They have been called Greeks (Crecas, Graeci, etc.) for so long that we no longer have records of when (or why) the name was given. There is some speculation that the Greeks called themselves Graikoi before they called themselves Hellenes, so the Romans would just have continued to use that older word, but this still doesn't answer the question of why the Greeks used to call themselves Greek. RJC TalkContribs 14:53, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
want can you tell me when i got there want will i see but this is a report
I find it curious that all of the Post-Roman period history is about the Byzantine empire. It says almost nothing at all about what was happening in Greece proper. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 15:06, 17 July 2010 (UTC)
Article needs a lot of work
See reasons just given about Byzantine history (etc.) The Neolithic section is inaccurate. If farming came into Europe simultaneously via both the Balkans and Greece, where are the citations? The oldest farming in Europe is in the Balkans/Romania/Ukraine by quite a bit, according to the archaeological texts I have in front of me (including Fagan). Farming comes into Greece from the North, judging by the crops and their genetics. None of the new research on domestication of plants in the Baltics and its spread into Greece is in this article. At the same time, it's clear that the people we know as Greeks/Hellenes were seafaring people who could have gotten farming items elsewhere (than the Baltics). However, that still doesn't change the fact that Greece engages in farming long after the folks in the Baltics. Nor does it show conclusively that the crops in Greece had an exclusively overland route. AFAIK, that is still being studied, jury is out. Jared Diamond has an account of the arrival of the olive in Greece (originally domesticated in the eastern Mediterranean) and implies that it did not travel overland. It may have been one of the earliest domesticates in Greece, imported from the eastern Med. Shortly thereafter, IIRC, Diamond quotes research that places the domestication of the almond in Greece. Sheep and goats arrive in Greece at some point (when? needs to be researched and put in article, crucial to Greek history), and modern genetic analysis shows them to be descendants of goats and sheep from the Zagroz mountains, who show up in the Baltics earlier than in Greece. So, it is not a simple situation, the Greek Neolithic and way more needs to be added.LeValley 08:11, 29 December 2010 (UTC)
No mention of Alexander?
I know there's a lot more detail on the specific period pages, but the transition between classical and hellenistic periods only mentions Alexander in passing (using the date of his death as a delineating date). Is there a reason his life isn't discussed to a greater degree in the main article? He was kind of the franchise for a while there...It discussed the aftermath of his death but nothing about his life or the expansions he wrought. Surely this is as notable as some of the minor battles that are mentioned in the classical section. Jbower47 (talk) 15:13, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
History of Greece or Greek history?
Various problems that other users have mentioned (particularly regarding the Byzantine and Ottoman periods and Greek diaspora communities) would be better addressed if this entire series were renamed "Greek history" rather than "History of Greece" and treated appropriately. Greek-speaking people have lived and continue to live in areas far flung outside the Greek peninsula. A series titled "History of Greece" might misdirect the reader to think only of the current Greek state, which is covered by the article "History of Modern Greece" while also creating nonsensical geographic controversies and redundant articles (e.g. should "Ottoman Greece" only cover the history of Greeks living under Ottoman rule in the current area of Greece only and leave out other Greek communities outside this area?) A series titled "Greek history" might be criticized for some sort of Panhellenism but it is unavoidably, the easiest and more reasonable way to deal with this topic. Cf. also the series "Jewish history". — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 11:07, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
Lead needs work, too
In addition to the problems discussed above, the lead section needs work. (Added tag to that effect, too.) The lead is ridiculously short, and so misses thousands of years of important Greek history. This is especially egregious considering that certain eras in Greek history had remarkable influence on Western culture.
— Molly-in-md (talk) 19:02, 28 September 2012 (UTC)
According to a radio program I heard on NPR, the economic crisis beginning in 2009 is only the latest in a line of multiple (4-5) economic crises Greece has suffered through in the modern, post-industrial, era. They have definitely been there, done that, when it comes to financial troubles. Given that, noting only the 2009 crisis seems incomplete. Thanks, Wordreader (talk) 06:16, 9 October 2012 (UTC)
Revert of recapture?
I am at a loss to understand how the Turkish forces could recapture Smyrna. In my understanding, recapture means "capture back" or "capture again". The Greeks took control of Smyrna from the Ottoman Empire in 1919, and unless the Turkish Republic is seen as a continuation of the OE, there is no way the Turkish forces could recapture anything. Or was the Turkish invasion of Cyprus half a century later also a "recapture"? I hope not. Regards! --18.104.22.168 (talk) 19:30, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
- Yes, in terms of territorial sovereignty, the Turkish Republic very clearly was the successor to the Ottoman Empire. The literature routinely calls the event a "recapture". Do you really want to put us through the motions of having to cite all those sources for you? Fut.Perf. ☼ 19:58, 11 February 2013 (UTC)
sorry I am new to the wiki but i noticed that between sections like for example Mycenaean civilization and Early Iron Age at the end of Mycenaean and start of Early iron age both mention the dark ages why? it is harder to read and it is kind of important. Thanks for reading and i hope i didn't offend any one. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ben the ballpoint pen (talk • contribs) 18:14, 6 February 2014 (UTC)
Arrival of Indo-Europeans
"In about 2100 B.C, the Proto-Indo-Europeans overran the Greek peninsula from the north and east." based on Roebuck 1966 (!) Don't you have a still older source??? 22.214.171.124 (talk) 07:27, 28 September 2014 (UTC)
Section on the civil war is incoherent
Since I'm not an "established" user, I can't edit it myself.
This is what I'm thinking of:
"The Greek Civil War (Greek: Eμφύλιος πόλεμος Emfílios pólemos), was fought between 1944 and 1949 in Greece between the Greek governmental and British forces. Funding for the government came from Britain and the U.S. The insurgents the military branch of the Greek communist party. According to some analysts on the left, it represented the first example of a post-war West interference in the political situation of a foreign country. The victory of the British—and later US-supported government forces led to American funding through the Truman Doctrine and the Marshall Plan]] and to Greece's membership in NATO and helped to define the ideological balance of power in the Aegean for the entire Cold War."
The first two sentences make it sound as if the government was fighting the British despite being funded by them. The third sentence has no verb. "West interference" should probably be "Western interference". There are two stray square brackets after "Marshall Plan".
This version (from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=History_of_Greece&oldid=600814564) looks more coherent, although it's missing some information:
"The Greek Civil War (Greek: Eμφύλιος πόλεμος Emfílios pólemos), was fought between 1944 and 1949 in Greece between the Governmental forces of Greece supported by the United Kingdom at first, and later by the USA, and the Democratic Army of Greece; the military branch of the Greek communist party. According to some analysts, it represented the first example of a post-war West interference in the political situation of a foreign country. The victory of the British—and later US-supported government forces led to Greece's membership in NATO and helped to define the ideological balance of power in the Aegean for the entire Cold War."