This is a compilation of Greek history

Helladic is a modern archaeological term meant to identify a sequence of periods characterizing the culture of mainlandancient Greece during the Bronze Age. The term is commonly used in archaeology and art history. It was intended to complement two parallel terms, "Cycladic", identifying approximately the same sequence with reference to the Aegean Bronze Age, and "Minoan", with reference to the civilization of Crete.

The scheme applies primarily to pottery and is a relative dating system. The pottery at any given site typically can be ordered into "Early", "Middle" and "Late" on the basis of style and technique. The total time window allowed for the site is then divided into these periods proportionately. As it turns out, there is a correspondence between "Early" over all Greece, etc. Also, some "absolute dates", or dates obtained by non-comparative methods, can be used to date the periods and are preferable whenever they can be obtained. However, the relative structure was devised before the age of carbon-dating (most of the excavations were performed then as well). Typically, only relative dates are obtainable and form a structure for the characterization of Greek prehistory. Objects are generally dated by the pottery of the site found in associative contexts. Other objects can be arranged into early, middle and late as well, but pottery is used as a marker.

The three terms "Helladic", "Cycladic", and "Minoan" refer to location of origin. Thus "Middle Minoan" objects might be found in the Cyclades, but they are not on that account Middle Cycladic. The scheme tends to be less applicable in areas on the periphery of the Aegean, such as the Levant. Pottery there might imitate Helladic or Minoan cultural models and yet be locally manufactured.

Helladic society and culture have antecedents in the Neolithic period in Greece with many innovations being developed and manifesting during the second and third phases of the Early Helladic period (2650–2050/2000 BC) such as bronze metallurgy, monumental architecture and fortifications, a hierarchical social organization, and vigorous contacts with other areas of the Aegean. These innovations would undergo further changes during the Middle Helladic period (2000/1900–1550 BC), marked by the spread of Minyan ware, and the Late Helladic period (1550–1050 BC), which was the time when Mycenaean Greece flourished.

The Sumerian King List is an ancient manuscript originally recorded in the Sumerian language, listing kings of Sumer (ancient southern Iraq) from Sumerian and neighboring dynasties, their supposed reign lengths, and the locations of "official" kingship. Kingship was believed to have been handed down by the gods, and could be transferred from one city to another, reflecting perceived hegemony in the region.^[1] Throughout its Bronze Age existence, the document evolved into a political tool. Its final and single attested version, dating to the Middle Bronze Age, aimed to legitimize Isin's claims to hegemony when Isin was vying for dominance with Larsaand other neighboring city-states in southern Mesopotamia.^[1][2]

Composition[edit]

The list blends prehistorical, presumably mythical predynastic rulers enjoying implausibly lengthy reigns with later, more plausibly historical dynasties. Although the primal kings are historically unattested, this does not preclude their possible correspondence with historical rulers who were later mythicized. Some Assyriologists view the predynastic kings as a later fictional addition.^[1][3] Only one ruler listed is known to be female: Kug-Bau "the (female) tavern-keeper", who alone accounts for the Third Dynasty of Kish. The earliest listed ruler whose historicity has been archaeologically verified is Enmebaragesi of Kish, ca. 2600 BC. Reference to him and his successor, Aga of Kish in the Epic of Gilgamesh has led to speculation that Gilgamesh himself may have been a historical king of Uruk. Three dynasties are absent from the list: the Larsa dynasty, which vied for power with the (included) Isin dynasty during the Isin-Larsa period; and the two dynasties of Lagash, which respectively preceded and ensued the Akkadian Empire, when Lagash exercised considerable influence in the region. Lagash in particular is known directly from archaeological artifacts dating from ca. 2500 BC. The list is important to the chronology of the 3rd millennium BC. However, the fact that many of the dynasties listed reigned simultaneously from varying localities makes it difficult to reproduce a strict linear chronology.^[1]

Sources[edit]

The following extant ancient sources contain the Sumerian King List, or fragments:

• Apkullu-list (W.20030,7)
• Babyloniaca (Berossus)
• Dynastic Chronicle (ABC 18)^[4] including copies, K 11261+ and K 12054
• Kish Tablet (Scheil dynastic tablet)
• UCBC 9-1819 ("California Tablet")
• WB 62
• WB 444 (Weld-Blundell Prism) ^[5]

The last two sources (WB) are a part of the "Weld-Blundell collection", donated by Herbert Weld Blundell to the Ashmolean Museum. WB 62 is a small clay tablet, inscribed only on the obverse, unearthed from Larsa. It is the oldest dated source (c. 2000 BC) containing the list.^[6] WB 444 in contrast is a unique inscribed vertical prism,^[1][7][8][9] dated c. 1817 BC, although some scholars prefer c. 1827 BC.^[10] The Kish Tablet or Scheil dynastic tablet is an early 2nd millennium BC tablet which came into possession of Jean-Vincent Scheil; it only contains king list entries for four Sumerian cities.^[11] UCBC 9-1819 is a clay tablet housed in the collection of the Museum of Anthropology at the University of California.^[12] The tablet was inscribed during the reign of the Babylonian King Samsu-iluna, or slightly earlier, with a minimum date of 1712 BC.^[13] The Dynastic Chronicle (ABC 18) is a Babylonian king list written on six columns, beginning with entries for the antideluvian Sumerian rulers. K 11261+^[14] is one of the copies of this chronicle, consisting of three joined Neo-Assyrian fragments discovered at the Library of Ashurbanipal.^[15] K 12054 is another of the Neo-Assyrian fragments from Uruk (c. 640 BC) but contains a variant form of the antediluvians on the list. The later Babylonian and Assyrian king lists, preserved the earliest portions of the list well into the 3rd century BC, when Berossus' Babyloniaca popularized fragments of the list in the Hellenic world. In 1960, the Apkullu-list (Tablet No. W.20030, 7) or “Uruk List of Kings and Sages” (ULKS) was discovered by German archaeologists at an ancient temple at Uruk. The list, dating to c. 165 BC, contains a series of kings, equivalent to the Sumerian antediluvians called "Apkullu".^[16]

The list[edit]

Early dates are approximate, and are based on available archaeological data; for most pre-Akkadian rulers listed, this king list is itself the lone source of information. Beginning with Lugal-zage-si and the Third Dynasty of Uruk (which was defeated by Sargon of Akkad), a better understanding of how subsequent rulers fit into the chronology of the ancient Near East can be deduced. The short chronology is used here.

Antediluvian rulers[edit]

None of the following predynastic "antediluvian" rulers has been verified as historical via archaeological excavations, epigraphical inscriptions, or otherwise. It is possible that they correspond to the Early Bronze AgeJemdet Nasr period culture which ended approximately 2900 BC, immediately preceding the dynasts,^[17] if they were not purely mythological inventions.

The Pre-Adamite hypothesis or Preadamism is a belief that humans existed before Adam. This assumption is contrary to beliefs describing Adam as the first human, as stated in the Bible and the Qur'an. Preadamism is therefore distinct from the conventional Abrahamic belief that Adam was the first human. Advocates of this hypothesis are known as "pre-Adamites", as are the humans believed by them to have existed before Adam. Preadamism has a long history, probably having its origins in early pagan responses to Abrahamic claims regarding the origins of the human race.

History and development of the hypothesis[edit]

Early development[edit]

See also: Monogenism and Polygenism

The first known debate about human antiquity took place in 170 AD between Theophilus of Antioch and an Egyptian pagan "Apollonius the Egyptian" (probably Apollonius Dyscolus), who argued that the world was 153,075 years old. Figures such as this occur regularly in Greek and Roman literature, as do the claims that the world and mankind have always existed.^{[citation needed]}

The most serious early challenge to biblical Adamism came from the Roman Emperor Julian the Apostate who, upon his rejection of Christianity and his conversion to Theurgy, a late form of Neoplatonism, accepted the idea that many pairs of original people had been created, a belief termed Coadamism or multiple-adamism.^{[citation needed]}

St. Augustine’s book The City of God contains two chapters indicating a debate between Christians and pagans over human origins: Book XII, chapter 10 is called "Of the falseness of the history that the world hath continued many thousand years", while that of book XVIII, chapter 40 is "The Egyptians’ abominable lyings, to claim their wisdom the age of 100,000 years". The titles indicate that Augustine saw pagan ideas concerning the history and chronology of the world and the human race as incompatible with the Genesis creation myth. Augustine’s position on this matter was supported by most rabbis and also by the church fathers, who generally dismissed views on the antiquity of the world as myths and fables not requiring any considered refutation.^[1]