A few comments on your conclusions, John
> So in conclusion I think we have the following
>
> 1. A Khattic-Hurro-U Caucasian substratum people, who travelled across
> Anatolia introducing farming to the southern Aegean, Crete and Greece
> circa 7,000 BCE. Prepottery people may have spread this culture
> through the Balkans (Starcevo) and across the Mediterranean (Cardial)
> (both impressed pottery cultures).
No argument from me here.
>
> 2. A Pelasgian-Tyrsenoi aristocracy, travelling from the Pontic,
> through the Caucasas, Paphloginia and settling NE Anatolia. Moving
> across the Dardanelles and into Lemnos, Imbros, and the north Aegean
> circa 3,000 BCE, possibly as far as Macedonia. They establish Early
> Macedonian I, II and III.
>
Tyrsenoi, yes - Pelasgian no. Why aristocracy? These
people were obviously metallurgists and builders too. I assume you mean NW
Anatolia.They also established Troy I/II, Limantepe, Poliochni and Thermi
(Lesbos).
> 3. An IE movement circa 2250 BCE from the Pontic Steppes via Usatova
> and related burnings, across the Dardanelles, driving people from group
> 1 across the Cyclades into southern Greece (related cultures). The
> Shift from Early Helladic I to II. This introduced Anatolian cultures
> into the area (but Crete was avoided, shifting smothly from Early to
> Middle Minoan). Bell Beaker cultures throughout Western Europe (inc
> Italy)
>
I don't agree with this account of the shift EHI/EHII. The ceramic style is
considered to be a devlopment of EHI, while architecture (House of Tiles,
Rundbau) are considered quite distinct from Troy I/II. Spyridon Martinatos
claimed that the Rundbau were granaries closely resembling those illustrated
from Egypt. The same archaeologist also claimed to have found pottery of
this
period associated with the Bronze Age drainage/irrigation works of Lake
Kopais (Boeotia), which in turn resemble those of Arkadia (including the
Tiryns dam). I don't see this level of organisation being the work of
displaced Anatolian neolithic farmers.
> 4. The 2000BCE expansion of the Thraco-Cimmerian cultures drives
> Achaean Greeks into Thessaly (circa 1950 BCE) establishing themselves
> at Dimini. Expansion of Illyrian IE cultures into Italy as the
> Terramare Venetic peoples.
>
Maybe this is just terminology, but why Achaeans? Is there any evidence for
this name at this early date? I would just say "proto-Greeks", among whom I
would place the Pelasgoi.
> 5. The 1900 BCE establishment of the Neshite-Hittite monarchy, and
> expansion westwards, drives Pelasgians across the Aegean into Thessaly,
> Attica and the Argos. From Thessaly the Hellenes spread southwards at
> the same time through Boetia, Attica, the Argolid and Achaea. The
> Persids rule Mycenae from 1600 BCE. They open the Black Sea route to
> the Caucasian Kolchis (Argonauts).
>
The ancients saw the Hellenes as having been Pelasgian, and the Pelasgians
(at least some) as having become Hellenic. In other words, Pelasgians and
Hellenes are fundamentally the same, not different people.
> 6. After Thera, 1450, Minoans taken over by Achaeans from the Mainland
> (Theseus). The 1400BCE expansion of the Hittite New Empire over the
> Arzawan (Luwian-Tyrsenian) kingdom drives the house of Pelops into the
> Pelopponesse. They adopt Greek and come to rule in Mycenae and Sparta
> (as the house of Atreus).
>
Slightly irrelevant, but general consensus is tending towards an early 17th
century (approx. 1625BCE) date for the eruption of Thera's volcano.
Nevertheless, the Mycenean (not Achaian yet) takeover of Crete dates from
around 1450. I would contend that Pelops' invasion represents the Achaian
takeover of the Persid kingdom(s), and Crete. This would explain somewhat
the Dorians' claim to be the returning Heraklids. This would also provide a
source for the Cretan Pelasgians, i.e. Myceneans who did not succumb to the
Achaians, but whose cultural and economic centre had been occupied.
> 7. Urnfield cultural expansion takes the Villanovan Italics into Italy
> (separation of Celto-Italic family). The 1300BCE the
> Moesia-Mysian-Mushkian move across the Dardanelles, destruction of Troy
> VI, and a Phrygian dynasty established amongst refugees of the Wilusan
> Easrthquake in the Troad. Trojan/Tyrsenoi (Paris/Alexander) seek help
> from their Pelopid (Menaleus) relatives.
>
Sounds good.
> 8. Mycenaean attempt to open the Black Sea route that had been closed.
> Trojan refugees allowed back to Illios/Wilusa. The Trojan War.
>
Okay.
> 9. Circa 1180 BCE Collapse of Mycenaean and Hittite worlds.
> Pelasgian/Peleset in Palestine. Phrygians, Mushki and Kaska destroy
> Hittite capital. NeoHittite states with a strong Pelasgian element in
> Cilicia. (Stories of Pelasgian Mopsus of Colophon, built into
> NeoHittite and Phoenician genealogies).
>
Sea Peoples and after, everything is in the melting pot. There must have
been a "Mycenean" (Pelasgian?) migration to Cyprus around this time, to
account for the Cypriot Greek dialect resembling "Arkadian", which in turn
is a continuation of Mycenean. So Peleset in Cilicia as well? Why not?
> 10. Dorians invade Pelopponessus circa 1000 BCE after having been
> expelled from Dodona by Epirite Illyrians. Illyrians (Terramare
> remnants reinfoced by Mesapics from across the Adriatic) settle
> Apaulia, pushing the Brutii and Sikels across the straits of Messina
> into Sicily.
>
Okay
> 11. Colonisation by Greeks, Thessalians to Aeolia, Ionians to Ionia and
> Dorians to Miletus circa 900-800 BCE. Settlements in Magna Graecia.
>
Settlements in Magna Graecia after the arrival of the Tyrrhenoi/Etruscans.
> 12. Movements of Pelasgian/Tyrrhenoi from Lemnos and Lydia to Tuscany
> circa 850 BCE.
>
And of course, before both, Phoenician colonies (Utica 10th c., Carthage
814).
I notice you've made no mention of pre-Sea People Pelasgians in Italy, a
contention I disagree with. It seems obvious to me that the Tyrrhenian Sea
was named by the Greeks for the Etruscans, who were already established
there. References to Pelasgians in Italy merely mean "indigenous" or
"autochthonous". (BTW I don't think the proposed connection "Paeligni -
Pelasgi" works.)
Referring to an earlier post of yours, I disagree with Prof.Thomson's claim
that the cult of the Kabeiroi on Samothrace was Pelasgian. To anyone with a
passing knowledge of Arabic, Kabeiroi immediately grabs the eye as meaning
"great, big". That the Greeks called them Megaloi Theoi, and the Romans
Magni Dei, only confirms their obvious Semitic source. Coincidentally, the
toponymic element "samo-" in Samothrace looks equally Semitic, root /smw/
"high or
prominent place".
It seems that the Pelasgians were an exceptionally unaccomplished people.
Herodotos explicitly states that they had no names for their gods, calling
them by a generic "theoi", which he glosses as meaning "disposers". They
also seem to have had no class of poets or history keepers, in that
they preserved no memory of their original homes or migrations. And the
archaeological record of their time in Greece (MHII) is sparse to say the
least, and has been characterised as "almost a reversion to the neolithic".
As regards their taking their name from "pelagos", I find that unlikely, but
I leave that to the professional linguists (Piotr?). In any case, I think
that their name was originally "Pelastikoi" with a "t", not a "g", an
alternative given by Hesychios. This would provide a better source for
"prst" and Philistia.
The only other link to Anatolia seems to be the "Pelasgian" name "Larisa".
If the Pelasgian language is unknown (IMO non-existent), we could ascribe
anything to it. But there is a possible source for Laris(s)a, in the
Egyptian R-3Ht, meaning "Entry to Fertile Lands". This seems to have been
the/a name for the Hyksos capital, Avaris. There is no problem (unlikely as
it may seem on the surface) with the phonetics, and semantically it fits as
the Greek Larisai were usually on fertile alluvial soils.
By the by, the Greek city name element "kar", "kor", "kary" etc can also be
plausibly linked to the Semitic root /qry/ "town, city", which in the
Phoenician "Kart" seemed to be a precise equivalent of the Greek "polis".
Thus we can explain the Karyatidai of the temple of Athena Polias as
"Daughters of the City (Polis)", rather than linking them to walnuts or
Carians.
I realise that your adherence to the idea of a "Mycenean-Minoan
Thalassocracy" will lead you to reject all this. The presence or absence of
the Phoenicians in the Aegean, while relevant to this discussion, it is a
subject of itself and perhaps should be discussed elsewhere. I'll limit
myself to saying that ancient tradition, modern archaeology and linguistic
evidence all point to an old and deep penetration of the Aegean and Greece
by the Phoenicians.
> Well folks - do we now have consensus or not?
>
> Regards
>
> John
>
Well, not quite.
Cheers
Dennis