Get Real! wrote:Paphitis wrote:Get Real! wrote:Paphitis wrote:Get Real! wrote:I didn’t need to get a PhD in History, Anthropology, and/or Archeology to figure out that there was a rat Paphitis… I just used common sense and my gut feeling that there was a problem, and I’ve been trying to encourage all my fellow compatriots to start doing the same instead of jumping on the Hellenic bandwagon.
This paper should be made compulsory reading for all Greek Cypriots so that they may hopefully wake up to reality as to how our history has been sabotaged and monopolized to push specific Greek agendas.
The study offers very clear
evidence that there is not even one scholar or historian on this planet that refutes Mycenaean migration to Cyprus.
Err, I'm afraid you haven't read it properly Paphitis... if anything it fully supports my theories!
How does it support your theories when the paper clearly states that Mycenaean Migration to Cyprus remains unchallenged and led to the gradual Hellenisation of the island up to the 7 century BC?
Where did you get that? Which line?
During the first half of the following century (LCIIIB: 1100-1050 BC) new
settlements were founded by a second, definitely more extensive influx of
Mycenaeans, which is basically attested by
- the introduction of a new tomb-type: chamber tombs with long dromoi and small
squarish/ rectangular chambers bearing close affinities to Mycenaean graves,
- many Mycenaean elements in the shape- and decoration-repertory of the of the
Proto-White Painted ceramic style, that appeared at the beginning of LCIIIB,
- various architectural features and artefacts of Aegean origin or inspiration and
most importantly
- the introduction of the Greek language
And this:
The only radical reconsideration of the Mycenaean colonization hypothesis, at
least of a part of it, has been proposed by Rupp (1985; 1987; 1988; 1998), who has
focused his research mainly on the processes that resulted in the formation of the
Cypriot kingdoms. Rupp argues that there was a significant decrease in the
complexity of the political organisation of the island between the 12th and 8th centuries
BC. After systematic analysis of the archaeological record he has concluded that
during this period the island was not divided in monarchical states but covered by a
regional network of chiefdoms (Rupp 1987: 147-149; 1998: 214-215). Based on the
sharp increase of settlement-sites observed around the middle of the 8th century (Rupp
1987: 149-151) and the more or less synchronous and sudden appearance of
monumental built tombs throughout the island (Rupp 1985; 1987: 15), Rupp suggests
that the state-based political system that characterized Cyprus during the Cypro-
Archaic and Classical periods emerged during the final decades of the Cypro-
Geometric III (850-750 BC) period. The rise in the number of sanctuaries (Rupp
1987: 152) as well as the relatively more widespread use of the Cypro-Syllabic script
(Rupp 1987: 151), which occurred during the Cypro-Archaic period (750-475 BC)
have been used as corroborative evidence. The process of the kingdoms’ formation is
viewed as an internal affair instigated by the expansion of the state societies in the
Levant and Mesopotamia, mainly the Phoenicians, that started as early as the 10th
century (Rupp 1987: 153-156; 1998: 216-218). The foundation myths mentioned
above are explained as the result of ancient political manipulation: “Many of these
Cypriot arriviste monarchs apparently concocted ancient heroic pedigrees in order to
claim they were, in fact, Achaean bluebloods” (Rupp 1998: 218-19).
Rupp does not reject the hypothesis that there was a migratory movement of
Mycenaeans to Cyprus during the 12th and 11t h centuries (Rupp 1998: 219).
Nevertheless he does not regard it as critical for the socio-political developments that
occurred during the course of the Early Iron Age. Furthermore he finds the current
colonization narrative as unreliable and inconclusive: “From my perspective this
defence of the standard historical reconstruction is based to a great extend on what
should be called factoids relating to Iron Age Cyprus. Unfortunately the present
skewed nature of the archaeological record for this period (i.e. an over-emphasis on
burial assemblages, finds from sanctuaries and works of art without adequate
provenance information) hinders the discussion” (Rupp 1998: 211).
