-----

quote:

---

Αρχική κοιτίδα των Πελασγών φαίνεται η Πόλη ΑΙΓΥΤΙΣ της Αρκαδίας.
Συγκεντρώθηκαν εκεί μετά τον Κατακλυσμό του Δευκαλίωνα προερχόμενοι όπως δείχνει & το Όνομα τους απο πρώην περιοχές του Αιγαίου Πελάγους οι οποίες επλήγησαν απο τον Κατακλυσμό.
Η Αιγύτις αποτελείτο απο 6 χωριά στην περιοχή της σημερινής Φαλαισίας.
Παυσανίας, Αρκαδικά XXVIV,5: "Εκ μανιών δέ οδός επι τον Αλφειόν έστιν όσο πέντε Σταδίων και 10 κατά τούτον Γαθεάτας Ποταμός εκδίδωσιν ες τον Αλφειόν, ες δέ τον Γαθεάτα πρότερον έτι κάτεισιν ο Καρνίων, τούτω μέν δή αι πηγαί της εισί της Αιγύτιδος υπο του Απόλλωνος του Καρεάτα το ιερόν, τώ Γαθεάτα δέ της Κρωμίτιδος χώραν εν Γαθέαις"
Παυσανίας, Αρκαδικά XXVIΙ,4: "παρά δέ Αιγυτών, Αιγύς και Σκιρτώνιο, Μαλέας και Κρώμοι και Βλένινα και Λεύκτρον".
Ενα Στάδιο = 185 μέτρα, άρα η Απόσταση απο τις Μανιές μέχρι τον Αλφειό είναι 2775 μέτρα.
Έτσι στην σημερινή Κοιλάδα του Γιαννο-Κάμαρα, κοιλάδα των Πηγών του Καρνίωνα υπήρξε η κόμη ΑΙΓΥΣ και το Έθνος των ΑΙΓΥΤΩΝ!
Οι πρωτο-Έλληνες Αιγύτες λάτρευαν τον ΚΑΡΝΟ ή Κριό - Θεό της Γονιμότητας μιά απο τις ταυτότητες του Αιγόμορφου Πάνα με Κέρατα & φωτοστέφανο σάν αντικαταστάτη του Θεού Ήλιου.
Στην συνέχεια λόγω υπερ-πληθυσμού μετανάστευσαν Βορειότερα.
Τμήμα των μετανεστευσάντων σε ΥπερΒόρειες περιοχές επανήλθε αργότερα ως Δωριείς.
Είχαν αποκτήσει Πολεμικό χαρακτήρα, σε αντίθεση με τον φιλειρηνικό χαρακτήρα των Αιγυτών. Τιμούσαν τον Απόλλωνα στον οποίο έδωσαν Πολεμικό χαρακτήρα ως Κάρνιο Απόλλωνα.
Ο Πολεμικός παιάνας των νέων Σπαρτιατών Πολεμιστών ήταν: " ιη ιη Καρνείε, ίει τα βέλη ...".

---

Δες αυτό το link που βρήκα
Herodotus on the Pelasgians and the Early Greeks
http://www.shsu.edu/~his_ncp/Heropel.html

quote:

---

Κάτσε βρε βιαστικέ!

Δες αυτό το link που βρήκα
Herodotus on the Pelasgians and the Early Greeks
http://www.shsu.edu/~his_ncp/Heropel.html

---

Psaxnontas vreika afto to link sxetika me tin glossa tous alla den nomizo na einai 100% akrives.
http://members.lycos.co.uk/illyrians/Pelazgian.html

quote:

---

Ja sas se olous ... eimai new member m/

Psaxnontas vreika afto to link sxetika me tin glossa tous alla den nomizo na einai 100% akrives.
http://members.lycos.co.uk/illyrians/Pelazgian.html

m/ GOTHIC RAGE m/

---

Μάλλον δεν είναι ακριβές...
Αλλά ποτέ δεν ξέρεις τι θα προκύψει τελικά...

Modern theories
From a tribal name, both Classical historians and archeologists have come to use the name "Pelasgian" to describe the inhabitants in the lands around the Aegean Sea and their descendants before the arrival of the waves of Greek-speaking invaders during the 2nd millennium BC. The results of archaeological excavations at Çatalhöyük by James Mellaart (1955) and F. Schachermeyr (1979) led them to conclude that the Pelasgians had migrated from Asia Minor to the Aegean basin in the 4th millennium BC. Further, scholars have attributed a number of non-Indo-European linguistic and cultural features to the Pelasgians:

Groups of non-Indo-European loan words in the Greek language, borrowed in its prehistoric development
Non-Greek place names in the region containing the consonantal strings "-nth-" (e.g. Corinth) or "-tt-" in the peninsula of Attica, or with "-ss-" (e.g. Larissa)
Certain mythological stories or deities (usually goddesses) that have no parallel to the mythologies of other Indo-European peoples like the Germans, Celts or Indians.
A small number of non-Greek inscriptions, the best-known found on Lemnos. These inscriptions use a version of the western Greek alphabet similar to that used in Etruscan inscriptions.
Not all of these features belong to the same people. For example, some evidence suggests that the "-ss-" placenames may have come from a language related to Hittite (for example: Parnassus may be related to the Hittite word parna- or "house"). Because of insufficient evidence from the 2nd millennium BC, no consensus exists on the relationship of these "Pelasgian" elements to their neighbors -- although much speculation has taken place, sometimes fueled by a desire for association with some of the earliest known inhabitants of Europe.

The poet and mythologist Robert Graves, in his works on Greek mythology, asserts that certain elements of that mythology originate with the native Pelasgian people — namely the parts related to his concept of the White Goddess, an archetypical Earth Goddess — drawing additional support for his conclusion from his interpretations of other ancient literature: Irish, Welsh, Greek, Biblical, Gnostic, and medieval writings. Mainstream scholarship considers Graves' thesis at best controversial, although certain literary circles and many neo-pagan groups have accepted it.

The French author Zacharia Mayani (1899 - ) put forth a thesis that the Etruscan language had links to the Albanian language. The Albanian régime of Enver Hoxha embraced this theory for propaganda reasons, and extended it to include the Pelasgians in this association. Mainstream scholars have paid Mayani's arguments little serious attention.

A Turkish scholar, Polat Kaya, has recently offered a translation of one of the inscriptions on Lemnos, based on his theory that it reflects a language related to Turkish. However, in the period of the putative date of the inscription the Turkish people lived several thousand miles away in southeastern Siberia. They began to migrate westward only about AD 300, a fact that has hindered acceptance of Kaya's translation.

Perhaps the least unlikely theory connects at least some of the Pelasgians with the Iberian-Caucasian cultures of the prehistoric Caucasus, known to the Greeks as Colchis. Numerous Georgian scholars -- including M.G. Tseretheli, R.V. Gordeziani, M. Abdushelishvili, and Dr. Zviad Gamsakhurdia -- claim both linguistic and anthropological similarities between the Pelasgians and the early inhabitants of the Caucasus -- as well as with almost every known non-Indo-European language in Europe.

The question awaits a definitive resolution, however. As Donald A. Mackenzie, writes (in Myths of Crete and Pre-Hellenic Europe, 1917, page 75):

"Before these [Hellenic] invaders entered into possession of the country [of Greece] it had been divided between various "barbarous tribes", including the Pelasgi and their congeners the Caucones and Leleges. Thirlwall, among others, expressed the view "that the name Pelasgians was a general one, like that of Saxons, Franks, or Alemanni, and that each of the Pelasgian tribes had also one peculiar to itself". The Hellenes did not exterminate the aborigines, but constituted a military aristocracy. Aristotle was quoted to show that their original seat was near Dodona, in Epirus, and that they first appeared in Thessaly about 1384 B.C. It was believed that the Hellenic conquerors laid the foundation of Greek civilization."
We moderns, less well grounded in the Classics, may also show less confidence in such authoritative and exact dates for the entry of the Indo-European speakers into peninsular Greece. Mackenzie continues, quoting George Grote:

"By what circumstances, or out of what pre-existing elements, the aggregate was brought together and modified, we find no evidence entitled to credit. There are, indeed, various names affirmed to designate the ante-Hellenic inhabitants of many parts of Greece--the Pelasgi, the Leleges, the Kuretes, the Kaukones, the Aones , the Temmikes , the Hyantes, the Telchines, the Bœotian Thracians , the Teleboæ , the Ephyri , the Phlegyæ , &c. These are names belonging to legendary, not to historical Greece — extracted out of a variety of conflicting legends by the logographers and subsequent historians, who strung together out of them a supposed history of the past, at a time when the conditions of historical evidence were very little understood. That these names designated real nations may be true but here our knowledge ends."
Links and references
Donald A. Mackenzie, Myths of Crete and Pre-Hellenic Europe, 1917 reviewed
Dr. Zviad Gamsakhurdia. The Spiritual Mission of Georgia
M.G. Abdushelishvili. The genesis of the aboriginal population of the Caucasus in the light of anthropological data (a monograph), Tokyo, 1968
J. Melaart. The Neolithic of the Near East, London, 1975
F. Schachermeyr. Die Agaische Fruezeit. Forschungsbericht über die Ausgrabungen im letzten Jahrzehnt und über ihre Ergebnisse für unser Geschichtsbild. Bd. I. Die Vormikenischen Perioden des Griechischen Festlandes und der Kykladen, Vienna, 1979
M.G. Tseretheli. Das Sumerische und das Georgische.- Revue de Kartvelologie, No 32-33, Paris, 1959
E.J. Furnee. Vorgriechisch-Kartvelisches: Studium zum ostmediterranen Subtrat nebst einem Versuch zu einer neuen pelasgischen Theorie, Leuven-Louvian, 1979
E.J. Furnee. Lexikalische Beziehungen zwischen Baskisch, Burusaski, Kartwelisch und Vorgriechisch.- Georgica, Jena-Tbilisi, B. 5, 1982
Rismag Gordeziani. Pre-Grecian and Georgian, Tbilisi, 1985 (in Georgian, German summary)
Akaki Urushadze. The Country of the Enchantress Media, Tbilisi, 1984, 25 pp (in Russian and English)

http://pelasgians.biography.ms/

Επίσης οι παρακάτω ...απόψεις.

The Risch-Chadwick Theory: An Obstacle to Progress

by
J. Faucounau
Member of the Linguistic Society of Paris, France

Since the decipherment of the Linear B script in 1952 and the resulting discovery of "Mycenaean Greek", the linguistic thinking has been dominated by the "Risch-Chadwick Theory" (hereafter : RC Theory). The influence of this theory, universally accepted thanks to John Chadwick's authority, has even governed archaeology. It has been impossible for archaeologists to advocate any reconstruction of the Greek Prehistory, which would be contrary to the Risch-Chadwick's linguistic basic hypothesis and its consequence: the Mycenaean dialect "is" the ancestor of all Greek dialects, except the West Greek ones, brought in by the Dorians at a late date. Therefore the Achaeans/Mycenaeans "have to be" the "First Greeks" into the Aegean". As a result, any written "pre-Mycenaean" artifact, like, for instance, the Phaistos Disk, "could not" be written in Greek. In the same way, as the Mycenaean Culture developed during the Late Bronze Age, a too remote date for "the Coming of the Greeks" had to be considered as "impossible". So, E. Grumach and S.Hood put it as late as 1200 BC and most other scholars dated it during the Middle Helladic period, until, under the pressure of the archaeological facts, the transitional period between E.H.II and E.H.III was suggested by J. Caskey. As J. Chadwick several times repeated it : "The Greek language arose through the mixture of a group of Indo-European speakers with an earlier population, and this group penetrated Greece at some time during the Middle Helladic or Early Helladic III period". (Chadwick 1975:819). This statement has long been considered as indisputable, and it is only recently that J. Coleman (2000), on the basis of the most recent archaeological findings, has proposed that the "Proto-Greeks" arrived from the north at the beginning of the Early Bronze Age, in the later fourth millennium BC.

It is not our intention to evaluate the plausibility of those diverse archaeological theories. But we believe that the time has come to put an end to the dictatorship of the RC Theory by pointing out its weaknesses and its implausibility.

1)- A theory which disregards the ancient tradition

The first weakness of the RC Theory is its total disregard of the most ancient tradition. For all the ancient authors, the Ionians were "the first Greeks". There are no conflicting views about this among Herodotus, Strabon or Pausanias, although there is one concerning the origin of the Ionians. We will notice, in particular, that Herodotus - who call them "Pelasgoi" - established a link between the Ionians and the oldest inhabitants of the Cycladic Islands. He wrote : "The inhabitants of the islands ... were also a Pelasgic people. They were later called Ionians for the same reason as the Ionians who came from Athens.." (Herodotus VII,95).

The word "Pelasgoi" is important. Influenced by the RC Theory, and because the Pelasgoi were said to have been the first inhabitants of Greece, most modern scholars have considered the name as designing a "Pre-Greek" (and therefore "non-Greek") population. But the obvious link with "Pelagos" : "the open sea" leads us to think that the primitive meaning of the word must have been "seafarers", a good description indeed of the Cycladic people during the Early Bronze Age. The most natural guess coming from the Herodotus account is therefore that a)- the Ionians were "the first Greeks" b)- they were seafarers and came by sea c)- they were once settled in the Cycladic Islands, probably during the Early Bronze Age.

Instead of accepting this "natural guess", J. Chadwick, confronted with the ancient testimonies, preferred to state : "There is no doubt that the ancient authors described Ionians as located in the Peloponnese; but it may be doubted whether these people can be identified with speakers of an Ionic dialect..."(Chadwick 1975:814). A gratuitous statement, obviously generated by his linguistic theory...

2)- A theory which disregards the geographical data

The RC Theory essentially rests upon a study of the Greek Dialects. Before proceeding to a complete examination of the problem, it is interesting to remind the best established facts in this field. The classification of the Greek dialects into four groups (Ionic-Attic, Arkado-Cypriot, Aiolic and West Greek) has been universally accepted, as has also been agreed by all scholars that "Greek" (or at least its Indo European component) has been brought by "immigrants from the north". From where, is still a matter of discussion. But the most probable place seems to be in the Balkans, south of the Low Danubian Valley. A simple glanze at the repartition-map of the four dialectal groups suggests, then, to attribute this repartition to three (or four) " waves of immigrants" having followed the paths indicated on our Figure 1 (whatever the timing of their arrival) : one wave corresponding to the "Proto-Ionians" (later dialects : Attic-Ionic) -- one to the "Proto-Acheans" (later dialects : Arkado-Cypriot and Aiolic) - one to the "Proto-Dorians" (later dialects : West Greek).

It is interesting to notice here that this scheme, suggested by the repartition-map, is coherent with the preceding "educated guess." It suffices to suppose that the "Proto- Ionian wave" arrived first, at the beginning of the Early Bronze Age.

Is this "reasonable guess" accepted by the RC Theory ?.. Not at all ! The Risch-Chadwick theory reduces the number of "dialectal waves" to only two. A surprising decision, to say the least, considering the repartition-map !

Another strong geographical implausibility of the RC Theory comes from the comparison between Cypriot and Attic concerning their links with Mycenaean. If we accept that Attic shares very few features in common with Mycenaean (See hereafter), the situation is different with the Arkadian and Cypriot dialects. The links are there sufficient to let one believe in a common ancestor - the Mycenaean - c.1200 BC, i.e. at a time close to the end of the Mycenaean era. Hence a killing objection : how to explain, then, in the frame of the RC Theory, that after the disappearance of the Mycenaean World the Arkadian dialect remained closer to the far-away Cypriot than to the nearer Attic dialect ?..

3)- A theory based upon a single linguistic fact

One might believe that the RC Theory, which asserts that the Mycenaean has been the ancestor of the three dialectal groups : Attic-Ionic, Arkado-Cypriot and Aiolic, would have an indisputable basis. This is wrong. Taking into account the linguistic links between Mycenaean, on the one hand, and Arkado-Cypriot and Aiolic, on the other hand, considering that Mycenaean is half-the-way between a "Proto-Achean" going back to the Early Helladic, and these later dialects cannot be criticized. But things are completely different with Attic-Ionic. The features common to Mycenaean and Attic-Ionic can be classified into two categories : a)- those which are archaic remnants, and therefore cannot prove anything concerning an eventual kinship between both dialects. b)- those - the only significant ones - which are innovations in comparison with the "Common Greek". And, in fact, E. Risch himself has recognized that there is only one linguistic feature of this kind : the assibilation ti > si (E. Risch 1956:256-7) !..

Opposite to this unique argument, one has to mention the many difficulties, existing in the RC Theory :

a)- absence of explanation for a missing etymological digamma in many Mycenaean words, like i-da-i-jo, ki-ri-jo, ri-jo, rapte, o-no, etc.

b)- double and difficult-to-explain vocalization : or/ro and ar/ra

c)- implausible explanation of the later transformation of the labio-velar before the vowel e.

These difficulties are easily solved when one adopts the scheme suggested by the Ancient Tradition and the Geography : The absence of an etymological digamma, the a-vocalization, the exceptions to the "regular rule" that Mycenaean qe- has become pe- in its true dialectal descendents (Beotian pettares v. / Ionic tesseres), etc. can be explained as the influence of the "Proto-Ionians" , who coming by sea were the true "first Greeks".

BIBLIOGRAPHY

CHADWICK J. 1975 : "The Prehistory of the Greek Language", C.A.H.Vol II, Part 2, pp. 805-819

COLEMAN J. 2000 :"An archaeological Scenario for the "Coming of the Greeks" ca. 3200 B.C.", J.I.E.S. Vol.28 pp.101-153.

FAUCOUNAU J. 1990 :"L'anciennete du dialecte ionien: un reexamen", Etudes Indo-Europeennes, pp.49-69

RISCH E. 1956 :"Caractere et Position du dialecte Mycenien" Etudes Myceniennes, pp.249-258

http://www.anistor.co.hol.gr/english/enback/v013.htm

PELASGIANS, a name applied by Greek writers to a prehistoric people whose traces were believed to exist in Greek lands.

If the statements of ancient authorities are marshalled in order of their date it will be seen that certain beliefs cannot be traced back beyond the age of this or that author. Though this does not prove that the beliefs themselves were not held earlier, it suggests caution in assuming that they were.

In the Homeric poems there are Pelasgians among the allies of Troy: in the catalogue, Iliad, ii. 840843, which is otherwise in strict geographical order, they stand between the Hellespontine towns and the Thracians of south-east Europe, i.e. on the Hellespontine border of Thrace. Their town or district is called Larissa and is fertile, and they are celebrated for their spearmanship. Their chiefs are Hippothous and Pylaeus, sons of Lethus son of Teutamus. Iliad, x. 428429, describes their camping ground between the town of Troy and the sea; but this obviously proves nothing about their habitat in time of peace. Odyssey, xvii. 175177, notes Pelasgians in Crete, together with two apparently indigenous and two immigrant peoples (Achaeans and Dorians), but gives no indication to which class the Pelasgians belong. In Lemnos (Iliad, Vii. 467; xiv. 230) there are no Pelasgians, but a Minyan dynasty. Two other passages (Iliad, ii. 681684; xvi. 233235) apply the epithet Pelasgic to a district called Argos about Mt Othrys in south Thessaly, and to Zeus of Dodona. But in neither case are actual Pelasgians mentioned; the Thessalian Argos is the specific home of Hellenes and Achaeans, and Dodona is inhabited by Perrhaebians and Aenianes (Iliad, ii. 750) who are nowhere described as Pelasgian. It looks therefore as if Pelasgian were here used connotatively, to mean either formerly occupied by Pelasgian or simply of immemorial age.

Hesiod expands the Homeric phrase and calls Dodona seat of Pelasgians (fr. 225); he speaks also of a personal Pelasgus as father of Lycaon, the culture-hero of Arcadia;

and a later epic poet, Asius, describes Pelasgus as the first man, whom the earth threw up that there might be a race of men.

Hecataeus makes Pelasgus king of Thessaly (expounding Iliad, ~i. 681684);

Acusilaus applies this Flomeric passage to the Peloponnesian Argos, and engrafts the Hesiodic Pelasgus, father of Lycaon, into a Peloponnesian genealogy. Hellanicus a generation later repeats this blunder, and identifies this Argive and Arcadian Pelasgus with the Thessalian Pelasgus of Hecataeus.

For Aeschylus (Supplices I, sqq.) Pelasgus is earthborn, as in Asius, and rules a kingdom stretching from Argos to Dodona and the Strymon; but in Pronietheus 879, the Pelasgian land simply means Argos.

Sophocles takes the same view (Inac/jus, fr. 256) and for the first time introduces the word Tyrrhenian into the story, apparently as synonymous with Pelasgian.

Herodotus, like Homer, has a denotative as well as a connotative use. He describes actual Pelasgians surviving and mutually intelligible (a) at Placie and Scylace on the Asiatic shore of the Hellespont, and (b) near Creston on the Strymon; in the latter area they have Tyrrhenian neighbors. He alludes to other districts where Pelasgian peoples lived on under changed names; Samothrace and Antandrus in Troas are probably instances of this. In Lemnos and Imbros he describes a Pelasgian population who were only conquered by Athens shortly before 500 B.C., and in this connection he tells a story of earlier raids of these Pelasgians on Attica, and of a temporary settlement there of Hellespontine Pelasgians, all dating from a time when the Athenians were first beginning to count as Greeks. Elsewhere Pelasgian in Herodotus connotes anything typical of, or surviving from, the state of things in Greece before the coming of the Hellenes. In this sense all Greece was once Pelasgic ; the clearest instances of Pelasgian survival in ritual and customs and antiquities are in Arcadia, the lonian districts of north-west Peloponnese, and Attica, which have suffered least from hellenization. In Athens itself the prehistoric wall of the citadel and a plot of ground close below it were venerated in the 5th century as Pelasgian; so too Thucydides (ii. 17). We may note that all Herodotean examples of actual Pelasgi lie round, or near, the actual Pelasgi of Homeric Thrace; that the most distant of these is confirmed by the testimony of Thucydides (iv. 106) as to the Pelasgian and Tyrrhenian population of the adjacent seaboard: also that Thucydides adopts the same general Pelasgian theory of early Greece, with the refinement that he regards the Pelasgian name as originally specific, and as having come gradually into this generic use.

Ephorus, relying on Hesiodic tradition of an aboriginal Pelasgian type in Arcadia, elaborated a theory of the Pelasgians as a warrior-people spreading (like Aryans ) from a Pelasgian home, and annexing and colonizing all the parts of Greece where earlier writers had found allusions to them, from Dodona to Crete and the Troad, and even as far as Italy, where again their settlements had been recognized as early as the time of Hellanicur, in close connection once more with Tyrrhenians.

The copious additional information given by later writers is all by way either of interpretation of local legends in the light of Ephoruss theory, or of explanation of the name Pelasgoi ; as when Philochorus expands a popular etymology stork-folk (ireXcuryoiireXapyoi) into a theory of their seasonal migrations; or

Apollodorus says that Homer calls Zeus Pelasgian because he is not far from every one of us, iITt xi-jc yijc ~r~ac ~TTLV. The connection with Tyrrhenians which began with Hellanicus, Herodotus and Sophocles becomes confusion with them in the 3rd century, when the Lemnian pirates and their Attic kinsmen are plainly styled Tyrrhenians, and early fortress-walls in Italy (like those on the Palatine in Rome) are quoted as Arcadian colonies.

Modern writers have either been content to restate or amplify the view, ascribed above to Ephorus, that Pelasgian simply means prehistoric Greek, or have used the name Pelasgian at their pleasure to denote some one element in the mixed population of the Aegean Thracian, Illyrian (Albanian) or Semitic. G. Sergi (Origine e diffusione della stirpe inedilerranea, Rome, 1895; Eng. trans. The Mediterranean Race, London, 1901), followed by many anthropologists, describes as Pelasgian one branch of the Mediterranean or Eur-African race of mankind, and one group of types of skull within that race. The character of the ancient citadel wall at Athens, already mentioned, has given the name Pelasgic masonry to all constructions of large unhewn blocks fitted roughly together without mortar, from Asia Minor to Spain.

For another view than that here taken see ACHAEANS; also GREECE: Ancient History, 3, Homeric Age.

BIBLI0GRAPHY.
Besides sections on the subject in all principal histories of Greece and bibliographies in G. Busolt, Gr. Geschichte, ii (Gotha, 1893, 164182); and K. F. Hermann (Thumser), Gr. Staatsaltertljmer, 6, see S. Bruck, Quae veteres de Pelasgis tradiderint (Breslau, 1884); B. Giseke, Thra/fisch-pelasgische Stmme auf der Balkanhalbinsel (Leipzig, 1858); F. G. Hahn, Albenesische Sludien (Jena, 1854); P. Volkmuth, Die Petasger als Semiten (Schaffhausen, 1860); H. Kiepert, Monatsbericht d. bert. Akademie (1861), pp. 114 sqq.; K. Pauli, Pine vorgr-iechzsche Inschrfft auf Lemnos (Leipzig, 1886); E. Meyer, Die Pelasger in Forschungen 1. alten Geschichte (l-lalle, 1892), i. 124; W. Ridgeway, Early Age of Greece (Cambridge, 1901), vol. i.; J. L. Myres, A History of the Pelasgian Theory (in Journal of Hellenic Studies, xxvii. 170); H. Marsh, Home pelasgicae (Cambridge, 1815); L. Benloew, La Grice avant les Grecs (Paris, 1877). (J. L. M.)

Καταρχήν οι διευκρινήσεις:

quote:

---

Δεν υπάρχουν ακριβή ιστορικά τεκμήρια που να αποδεικνύουν την ύπαρξη και κυρίως τις επιρροές του λαού στην ελληνική γλώσσα.

---

ESOTERICA.gr Forums !

© 2010-11 ESOTERICA.gr