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

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 28 March 2023 and 9 June 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): CoolQuokka (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Orangearnie, BargeWoodland.

— 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)