Talk:History of Greece

Question

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)

Aegean civilization

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)

There are also Genetics, don't forget them Historyandsciencelearn (talk) 14:41, 20 February 2021 (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.

I havent made the changes yet, as I wanted to inform readers beforehand. But I think the weakeness of the Roman and Bylzantine Greece article is evident by itself. Colossus 20 July 2017 10:14 (UTC)

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:

1. 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)
2. 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?

I just had to clean out stuff on "80000 BC Greeks". What gives? dab (ᛏ) 10:36, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

why that image

Why do you use the coat of arms of the Greek Army in this article? 62.103.124.3 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)

3- it says Turkish ablaze symrna when they recaptured there. However, it is not the case, Greek ablaze there when they were withdrawing Anatolia. Think logically, why would Turks ablaze there when they recapture there? They will live there! IT would be nonsense if they ablazed there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.197.253.58 (talk) 14:02, 26 March 2016 (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 62.1.245.164 (talk) 20:45, 7 March 2008 (UTC)

greece

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 67.49.76.255 (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 ^Talk_Contribs 14:53, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

You can also check the very comprehensive Names of the Greeks article for more info. Constantine ✍ 15:19, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

jhfhsa bvstqg hgwf —Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.96.157.224 (talk) 01:37, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

AAA —Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.202.34.34 (talk) 21:09, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

want can you tell me when i got there want will i see but this is a report

robert neal i'm doing a report on i'm coming there ,but want would i see there —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.234.116.47 (talk) 11:35, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Byzantine Greece

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 78.149.254.38 (talk) 15:06, 17 July 2010 (UTC)

There wasn't a "Greece proper" during those times because there was no Greece. There was only Rome and the Greek speaking people who lived inside it. "Greece proper" implies the existence of clear cut borders based on race which is a modern invention. CapJoe2 (talk) 01:51, 10 May 2020 (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 94.122.119.173 (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)

Economics

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)

Economic Crisis had started earlier than 2009

I have to agree with this. I don't have any references except that my wife is Greek and we talk with her family regularly. They are in the North - so their perspective may be different from other Greeks.

The economic decline of Greece was happening way before 2009. When Greek adopted the Euro and dropped the Drachma - there was a huge amount of inflation. A loaf of bread used to cost 1000 drachma, but merchants inflated their prices when the euro came in - so that loaf of bread would be 7 euro. Everything went up in price due to the currency conversion and never quite settled back to their original drachma equivilent. Furthermore, items that were produced cheaply in Greece would be exported to the other EU countries - so there was a drastic rise in costs all over. At the same time, Greece started to reign in their tax collection and applying more and more taxes and fees throughout. Foreign ownership and foreign "big box" stores were allowed into Greece. Smaller supermarkets were drowned out. The Greek government saw all of this as a good thing - more money. But it was on the backs of the common people.

Also with the adoption of the Euro, the Greek government lost their ability to debase their currency. This was the single biggest factor behind the economic crisis.

Then there was the issue with the Olympics. Greeks had expected the 2000 Olympics would automatically go to them. When it went to Atlanta, there was a surge of nationalism over the issue (there were other factors too no doubt, but this was one of the main drivers). Greek politicians had pretty much a "blank check" for bidding on the 2004 Olympics. All of the reasons they thought they didn't get the 2000 Olympics had money thrown at it. Greece was always a poor state, but the fiscal irresponsibility started in order to get the 2004 Olympics. They upgraded the subway system in Athens, the airport, major highways - there was a ton of infrastructure spending. Even outside Athens this was occurring. Thessaloniki was modernized and transformed to the point of being unrecognizable between 2000 and 2005.

The economic crisis that hit in 2008 simply took a debt riddled country and broke it. The crisis got so bad that some cities had nearly half of their businesses close down. So we now had a country that already saw a massive increase in the cost of living, and now their government was having issues and decided that austerity was the best way to fix it. This is one of the main reasons for the surge of domestic terrorism and civic disobedience.

But the economic crisis started long before 2009. I would say it started in 2004 - after the Olympics. Greece didn't make as much off the Olympics as they had hoped - and that was when the financial problems started appearing on the Greek news regularily. Yesurbius (talk) 23:25, 18 April 2017 (UTC)

I am Greek and live in Evros (regional unit), and I think you have got some facts seriously wrong. Greece indeed has a problematic economic history. The Greek state has declared bankruptcy 5 times: in 1827, 1832, 1843, 1893, and 1932. In each case there was an inability of the state to repay its public debt, particularly foreign loans. On several occasion, the government was forced to cede control over financial matters and state monopolies to its foreign loaners. A relatively short description is given in the following Greek article: http://alexiptoto.com/οι-πέντε-πτωχεύσεις-της-ελλάδας/

The Greek military junta of 1967–74 tried to stimulate economic growth (and increase its popular support) by starting massive infrastructure projects in areas usually neglected by the governments in Athens (several areas gained electricity, connections to the water supply and sanitation systems, and hospitals for the first time in their history), offering loans to various private businesses, and debt relief to farmers. Some of its plans worked, others failed spectacularly. By the time the junta fell in July 1974, the Greek public debt was estimated to the equivalent of 400 million euros. See: http://www.istorikathemata.com/2010/08/1974.html

From 1974 to 1981, the New Democracy (Greece) party was in power. It again tried to modernize Greece, stimulate growth, and raise the prosperity level of the average Greek citizen. Wages for male workers (in real prices) increased by 22% and for female workers by 40%. More people were able to buy previously rare and expensive goods, such as automobiles and televisions. However, government expenditures increased greatly and so did the foreign loaning. By October 1981, when the party fell from power, public debt had increased to the equivalent of 2.200 billion euros. See: http://www.istorikathemata.com/2010/08/1974.html

From 1981 to 1989, the PASOK party was in power. It tried to pass major reforms in almost all aspects of Greek life, and to increase the prosperity of the average citizen (to gain more voters). It started by doubling pension payments. By the time it fell from power (due to a corruption scandal), the public debt had risen to the equivalent of 23 billion euros. See: http://www.istorikathemata.com/2010/08/1974.html

From 1989 to 1993, Greece had three different coalition governments and one government controlled by the New Democracy party. Despite attempts at reform during the time of political instability, public debt kept rising throughout the period. Greek public debt went from 71% of the country's GDP to 98.2%. See: http://www.istorikathemata.com/2010/08/1974.html

From 1993 to 2004, the PASOK party was in power, promising a modernization of the country and its economy. There was some real growth in GDP for much of the period, along with increases on spending on infrastructure and actual needs of the public (health, education, etc). This is the government which won the bid for the Olympics 2004 and the government which dropped the drachma and joined the euro. When it fell from power in March 2004 (shortly before the Olympics), the public debt had went to 97.4% of the country's GDP. See: http://www.istorikathemata.com/2010/08/1974.html

From 2004 to 2009, the New Democracy party was in power. Despite a promise for major reforms in the face of PASOK's reputation for broken promises, it managed to decrease the actual earnings of the public coffers by 20 billion euros and to increase public spending by 40 billion. The state was spending was spending much more than its actual revenue. Just the year 2008 and the first 10 months of 2010 added 57 billion euros to the public dept. The crisis had officially begun by the time it fell. See: http://www.istorikathemata.com/2010/08/1974.html

Chronic mismanagement had started long before the Olympics, but one of the major problems was never about the infrastructure spending. Greece's net exports have long been its major hole in the economy. Greece mainly produces and exports agricultural products, fish, cement and concrete, pharmaceuticals, non-alcoholic beverages, rebars, cigarettes, beer, dairy products, and aluminium. It depends on imports for oil and oil products (despite Greece having a small production of its own oil), defense equipment for its military and weapons for police and civilians, almost all motor vehicles from motorbikes to tanks, telecommunications devices (such as telephones, radios, televisions, cellular phones, etc), computers and other electronic equipment, and several other technological products. We have an overextended service sector (82.8%), an underdeveloped industrial sector (13.3 %), and a long-declining primary sector (4%). This has served as a recipe for disaster.

The Athens subway system had little to do with the Olympics. Athens Metro started being constructed in 1992, with the goal to modernize Athens' transport system, to decrease its traffic congestion, and to reduce its chronic smog problem. Due to a series of production delays, it took about 8 years to complete the initial project and deliver it for use, other 4 years to connect the line to Athens' only operational airport, and other 9 years to expand the line to other parts of Athens. Greek humor writers and political satirists often joked about the constant delays to the completion of the project.

Greece has a problem with domestic terrorism for several decades. The Revolutionary Organization 17 November was an urban guerilla organization that was active from 1975 to 2002, and was considered the primary terrorist organization in the country. It was responsible for 23 assassinations and 103 attacks against Greek, Turkish, British, and American targets. The initial assassination victim was an American called Richard Welch, who was serving as the CIA station chief in Athens. In 2002, terrorist Savvas Xiros managed to injure himself in a failed bombing attack and was arrested. Police used information from him to arrest multiple other members of the organization, which was soon considered defunct. At the time there was a celebratory mood that Greece had finally been able to resolve its terrorism problem. It proved to be a delusion. Terrorist attacks against various targets continue to the present day, with the terrorists claiming responsibility in the name of various organizations. Terror never ends.

As for civil disobedience, the neighborhood of Exarcheia in Athens has long served as Greece's most prominent center of activities for socialists, anarchists, anti-fascists, and far-leftist organizations. They keep organizing major and minor riots since the 1970s, attacking police stations, banks, and other symbols of authority. Scenes of Athens burning are in the news for as long as I can remember. Riots also occur in other cities in Greece, but are much less often. Public protests over various political, financial, religious, and educational matters have also long been common. Particularly since a series of governments have attempted "reforms" which are seen as unpopular, deeply offensive, or going against the interests of much of the local population. Dimadick (talk) 16:09, 4 May 2017 (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! --79.160.40.10 (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)

No need. I accept your explanation. Food for thought, actually - reconquista and all that. Thanks. --79.160.40.10 (talk) 23:06, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

formating?

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.[3]" based on Roebuck 1966 (!) Don't you have a still older source??? 93.199.29.140 (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.[27] 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.[28] 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.[26] 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."

OnceAndFutureFlopsy (talk) 17:52, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 7 April 2015

the greek worshiped certain gods 24.94.187.97 (talk) 23:34, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

 Not done as you have not requested a change. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format. --I am k6ka ^{Talk to me!} _{See what I have done} 23:41, 7 April 2015 (UTC)

Broken Link

I can't edit this article, but I just wanted to point out that there is a broken link in the section for Hellenistic Greece. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bananaslug12345 (talk • contribs) 21:22, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on History of Greece. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Attempted to fix sourcing for http://genocidescholars.org/images/Resolution_on_genocides_committed_by_the_Ottoman_Empire.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 13:21, 29 March 2016 (UTC)

Beginning of Ancient Greece era

I've raised a similar question in Ancient Greece too: I fail to see why Ancient Greece era begins after the Dark Ages, we have no reference about this. In genral Ancient Greece refers to Greek antiquity, similar to Ancient Egypt which includes pre-Dynastic Egypt too.Alexikoua (talk) 10:40, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on History of Greece. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://genocidescholars.org/images/Resolution_on_genocides_committed_by_the_Ottoman_Empire.pdf
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://antiquity.ac.uk/ant/062/Ant0620234.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090101104332/http://projectsx.dartmouth.edu/classics/history/bronze_age/index.html to http://projectsx.dartmouth.edu/classics/history/bronze_age/index.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:00, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

neolithic section needs amendment/ inclusion of indo-european migration/ invasion info

The Neolithic Revolution reached Europe beginning in 7000–6500 BC when agriculturalists from the Near East entered the Greek peninsula from Anatolia by island-hopping through the Aegean Sea. The earliest Neolithic sites with developed agricultural economies in Europe dated 8500–9000 BPE are found in Greece.[2] The Proto-Greek language (also known as Proto-Hellenic) is the assumed last common ancestor of all known varieties of Greek, including the Mycenaean language.[3] The transition from the Greek Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age (or Early Helladic I–II) occurred gradually when Greece's agricultural population began to import bronze and copper and used basic bronze-working techniques.[4] During the end of the 3rd millennium BC (circa 2200 BC; Early Helladic III), the indigenous inhabitants of mainland Greece underwent a cultural transformation attributed to climate change, local events and developments (e.g., destruction of the "House of the Tiles"), as well as to continuous contacts with various areas such as western Asia Minor, the Cyclades, Albania and Dalmatia.

this paragraph doesnt explain invasion/ migration of indo european greeks into neolithic non indo european greece, according to IE theory, the greeks should have invaded the neolithic culture of greece and pushed non indo europeans like minoans to the island of crete. This para needs elaboration. 202.188.53.210 (talk) 21:47, 18 December 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

• Andreas Papandreou (3585503528).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:08, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

BC vs. BCE

It's only my rough impression, but "BCE" seems more common in Wikipedia articles. Why is the convention "BC" used throughout this one? A motivation for asking is that BCE has been argued as less Christian-centric, hence more neutral, as it emphasizes the era as opposed to the religion's central messiah, Christ. 2603:7080:AF01:7E74:80F1:2091:115B:569 (talk) 21:17, 21 October 2023 (UTC)

See WP:ERA. The choice between these two conventions is a matter of editorial taste, and as such, subject to widely diverging preferences on the part of editors. Because that is so, and because there is no objective criterion for deciding that one of them is better than the other, our rule is that we leave articles as they are, using whichever of the two has been in place, to ensure stability rather than the pointless edit-warring that would otherwise be happening all the time. Fut.Perf. ☼ 18:19, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the follow-up. 2603:7080:AF01:7E74:5D10:23BA:CB69:C5B5 (talk) 10:29, 6 November 2023 (UTC)