Talk:Greek colonisation

The map
For ages now, editors have been adding colonies to the map at the bottom of the page. For ages now, that map has had so many colonies on it that large sections (particularly around the Aegean) are completely unusable and illegible. It's an absurd situation. Something should change. I propose deleting the map, but am open to other suggestions. Furius (talk) 13:24, 13 October 2022 (UTC)


 * No one has replied to this, so I'm going to take bold action. Furius (talk) 22:25, 27 September 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: History of Ancient Greece
— Assignment last updated by Johnstoncl (talk) 20:40, 20 May 2023 (UTC)

Theories on motive and characteristics
The article is too short on several accounts, first being motive. Bintliff (2012) raises arguments against the motive of overpopulation: population climaxes in the Southeas Aegean occurred in the 5th and 4th C. BCE, a great while after the establishment of many colonies (which peaked from the Late Geometric to Archaic Era, very roughly the 8th to mid-6th C. BCE). Bintliff also mentions Crielaard (1992-1993), who proposes that elite competition/ambition or factional conflicts could have led to certain basileis/high aristocrats leaving to establish a new settlement abroad. Colonists of lower status might have been clients who were obliges to accompany their patron, or volunteers drawn by the promise of larger estates, as must have been the case for volunteers from other cities than the leading one.

The idea of state-sanctioned, organized enterprises has also become problematic in recent years. Katherine Lomas (2017) mentions that Greek colonization was gradual/piecemeal. Bintliff argues the same, and adds that 1) settlers were usually from several cities if not ethnicities (as "is" mentioned in the article), and 2) Greek colonies were "almost all intended to function like autonomous Aegean city-states..." (p.249)

"Colonisation" for that matter, has become a problematic term: it relates to the later West-European phenomenon, to which the use of force or gaining control over the land/indegenous people is constitutive. While the settling was violent in some places, it is certainly not constitutive to Greek "colonization". -- sources: Bintliff, John. The Complete Archaeology of Greece: From Hunter-Gatherers to the 20th Century A.D.. United Kingdom: Wiley, pp.246-249, 2012.

Crielaard, J.-P. How the West was won: Euboeans vs. Phoenicians. Hamburger Beiträge zur Archäologie 19/20, 235–260, 1992–1993.

Lomas, Katherine. The rise of Rome: from the Iron Age to the Punic Wars. London: Profile books LTD, p. 33, 2017 ) --

I do not have more sources or specific examples to back this up. Both Bintliff and Lomas, however, are excellent introductory works. Moreover, presenting only one side of the debate seems unwise to me, so I would like to add at least a mention of these matters to the article starting by bringing this up in the Talk. Regularclassicsstudent (talk) 23:11, 13 November 2023 (UTC)

Using "Euboeans" Vs. "Eretrians"
I am not well read on this topic, however i still think that I (hopefully) make a good point. (Also sorry if i have bad english)

the wikipedia article for the greek town of Eretria contains all the historical information about Eretria/Euboa, and since Eretria does appear to be the correct term ( the term "Euboans" made me a bit confused, since that implied that their land area was jusr Euboa + colonies, when in the Eretria wikipedia article it says they did have control of other islands, other than Euboa), plus the term "Eretria" and "Eretrians" is used extensively in the Lelantine war page, and the Eretria page, so it would imo make the average reader less confused when reading those 2 articles.

I suggest every mention of "Euboans" and "Euboa" be changed to "Eretrians" or "Eretria" in this article, and also for the links that link to Euboa be changed to the one for "Eretria", since it has much more information on the greek city state and its history.

I would do the edit myself, but i'm not well versed on this topic, and would prefer to have conformation from other wikipedia editors on this change. John the man the plan on the train track (talk) 13:10, 18 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Nvm. I'm pretty sure most if not all of this is bullshit.
 * John the man the plan on the train track (talk) 12:39, 19 June 2024 (UTC)