Heracles - What is the truth behind the myth? 

I live near Mycenae, and for me, looking at the Mycenaean geography, and routes of expansion, Heracles was almost certainly symbolic of the Mycenaean civilisation and their expansion from perhaps 1800bc through to 1500bc. The name firstly, Hera-cles indicates that he was originally the champion of Hera, and the female gods as they existed were likely dominant in culture before the eruption of Santorini in around 1620bc. The 'Greeks' of the time then though, oh, we must have this wrong and the male gods, Zeus (Sky God), and Poseidon in particular became important... After Santorini Tsunamis swept the coast from the sea and the sky darkened for 2 years... The Heracles became the champion of Zeus, but by this time the name was fixed. The 12 labours likely represented the success and expansion of the Mycenaeans, initially from their first capital, Tiryns around 1800bc, with Mycenae only becoming important around 1600bc hence Eurythesus was king of Tiryns and Heracles returned there after each labout (but the last). The first 6 labours are set in the Peloponnese. First the Namean lion, conquer Namea, a key route into the core Mycenaean territory. Then the Lernaean Hydra Ancestral grounds, key Marsh and a route to Arcadia, then the Arcadian Deer etc. Then the 7th labour, the Cretan bull, obviously symbolising the dominance of the Mycenaeans over the Minoans, who again were devastated by the Santorini eruption, and so Heracles and the success and growth of Mycenaean dominance are wrapped up in each other. As mentioned, powerful symbolism and legitimisation of the ruling classes, a political and social tool, a justification of the god given rights of the Mycenaeans to exist and dominate.

There probably were many Heracleses, important people who did great thing during the bronze age, figures some royal and some not, over time the various deeds off them would be exagerated, made up, and get tangled up with myth, eventually these various stories and personalities would coalesce into a singular hero. That is my theory at least.

The Heracleidae, the sons, grandsons and the descendents in general, of Heracles's family, are well recorded in the ancient sources, since they had a crucial role in the dynastic wars at the end of the Mycenaean period, which lead to the fall of the Atreidae dynasty of Mycenae, and to the end of the Achaean rule in Peloponnese, since the Heracleidae were the leaders of the Doric campaigns in Peloponnese. So in my opinion, yes Heracles was a historical figure, probably a great conqueror, or military leader, at whom had been attributed incredible deeds after his death, in order to increase his legend.

The national Greek hero. Every Greek tribe mention him as their anscestor.

Something interesting to note, which I feel pushes the Heracles stories into more clearly mythological and allegorical territory, is that his labors align with the 12 Zodiac signs. It would have been a useful mnemonic device to keep track of the calendar during the post-bronze age Greek dark ages.

If we recall the first deeds of Heracles, in his youth, and how he became the savior of Thebes, we can see the historical figure behind the legend. Heracles's first great victory was against the Minyans of Orchomenus, who at the time was the dominant power of Boeotia, and not Thebes, who were submissive to Orchomenus's power. The Minyans (who deserve their own video), an Aeolian tribe, were considered the master builders of the Bronze Age Greece, with the drying of the Lake Copais, being their greatest achievement. Heracles at the command of the troops of Thebes, crushed the forces of Orchomenus, and he destroyed all the Minyan drainage works, so the Copais who in the meantime was transformed to a fertile plain, became flooded again. So Orchomenus's economy and power was annihilated, and Thebes became the most powerful Boeotian city since then. So we see that Heracles started obviously as a strategic millitary leader. And i believe that this millitary leader is the actual historical figure of Heracles. By the way, because Heracles's animosity against the Minyans of Orchomenus, he was later left out from the events of Argonautica, which was a millitary campaign organized by the Minyans of Iolcos.

Considering we have in recorded history men like Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar and Brennus and Attila the Hun and Genghis Khan, I choose to believe Heracles did exist. Perhaps he was a Mycenaean warlord that had gathered a koryos or Fianna of warriors and adventurers around him like Fionn Mac Cumhail. Perhaps the 12 Labors were slightly exaggerated accounts of his exploits as a mercenary for King Eurystheus - the Hydra, for example, could have just been a very large snake, and the multiple heads were that serpent's disturbed brood. Perhaps like the Phoenicians and Pytheas in the Iron Age and the later Vikings in the Middle Ages, Heracles spent his free time sailing the seas, maybe in search of new lands to raid, or trade in.

Woot! New Wanx TV dropped! As for my opinion on Heracles, he is likely based on a real person , but whose stories were embellished during the Greek Dark Ages to the point where it’s about 95%+ fiction

Ἡρᾰκλῆς = Heracles , means the glory, the magnanimity of Goddess Hera. 1.Hercules represents the primitive man, who according to the oracle had to take part on the side of the Gods to defeat the Giants in Gigantomachy. 2.Demigod Heracles, the one who did the 12 labors. Often these two Heracles are considered the same person.

congratulations for your research! one hypothesis is that the name Heracles was a title of honor for some local hero, for the small communities of the Mediterranean and not only...the stories travel from the time of the Neanderthals the form of myth,we can say that the mythology is History before the invention of writing!

Perseus is also historical; the Persians were saying that they were related to the Greeks by their ancestor Perseus, and all of their gods are Helios Hyperion and Apollo are the same deity and they’re the gods of a lot of countries. the Heraclids ruled Lydia for 505 years through 22 generations with son succeeding father all down the line from Agron to Candaules. There’s four Hercules figures. Hercules is a dying and rising god like Dionysus and there’s two or four different Dionysus as well; Dionysus is the same as Osiris. In Egypt dionysus is the father of Herakles but in Greece Dionysus is the father-in-law of Herakles and his daughter marries Herakles and brings Herakles demise. Demeter is also a dying and rising god in the Elysian mysteries, like the Mithraic and Zoroastrian mysteries.

I always wondered about the figures behind the Argonauts, Heracles, Eteocles and Polynices, Theseus and how would those fit in the Bronze age and the age before since many seem to exist before the times of the Omeric Epic, but not so far away to be considered ancient

Makedonians proved their Hellenic ancestry through Herakles lineage

Its possible that Hercules existed. We saw through more recent history how Alexander's account became mythological from Calisthenes to pseudo-calesthenes and so forth. Alexander throughout his life became demi-god son of Zeus or Amun. Later he faced legendary nations and saw legendary places. In islamic tradition became a prophet. If these things are documented in recorded history, why this couldn't happen with Hercules, Achilles or even Dionysus (all of them were conquerors)

My personal belief is that he existed. Of course I can not prove it. Great to see new video from you!

Ravens introduced me to your channel. Subscribed!

I remember seeing an Amazon special saying his name was Alkiades, he was from Argos, and his seige on Troy was a precursor to the Trojan War. It was an attempt to stop the Hittites from leveraging trade deals that hurt mainland Greece. It didn’t work and the walls of Troy were rebuilt to be impenetrable.

And a fan fact, the Heraclean Knot, or Hercules's Knot, according to the tradition was the knot that Heracles made, so he could carry on him, the skin of the Nemean Lion. From then the Heraclean Knot, became a tradition carried through all the Greek and later Greco-Roman world, from the Late Bronze Age period to the end of the Byzantine Era (for almost 3.000 years)! Generals, Kings, Emperors, from Alexander the Great (you can see him carrying the Heraclean Knot, in the famous mosaic from Pompei), to Byzantine generals and emperors, all of them carried with honour the Heraclean Knot!

Herakles was a demi-god because he was the legendary ancestor of the Dorians or Heraklids, who conquered the Peloponese (c. 1130 BCE IMO) and were closely related to other conqueror dynastes in Epirus and Crete, as well as surely friendly to powerful Athens and Thebes. The real character almost certainly existed (per the core legend of the Heraklids and their exile) but was attributed endless legends of all kinds, so what he actually did or not is most unclear. What is clear is that he was considered much worthier than his Atreid overlords, relatives and rivals, and thus he must have achieved notable victories of some sort and show important leadership skills. Real or not, some of his legends such as the ones located in the far west, are indicative of actual events such as the archaeologically documented Greco-Iberian interactions in the El Argar B period (c. 1550-1300 BCE). Atlas is a real icon of that period in South Iberia (a man holding an arch, the sky, over his head, known as "Indalo" in the Almerían tourism publicity scheme since decades ago), the name "Hesperides" or "Hesperia" ("the far west", "the lands of the evening star") is the most plausible origin of "Hispania", Geryones may well represent an actual king from Iberia (either El Argar or VNSP civilizations). A question I have since long ago is whether the "-kles"/"-cules" part of the name is something more generic for "hero". The Celtic version of Hercules is called Culluch, without the Her(a)- part (and only recalls the boar legend), this sounds similar to Colossus and even to Philistine Goliath, all them implying an unusually powerful, gigantic, man. The etymology of κολοσσός is unknown and debatably pre-Indoeuropean (Pelasgo-Tyrsenian?), although it's been argued that it could be related to κολοφών (summit) and κολώνη (hill, cognate of Lat. collis = hill and thus Indoeuropean, from *kelH- = to rise, hill), of comparable "great" or "high" meaning. The common etymology for Herakles is from Ἥρα (Hḗra, “Hera”) +‎ κλέος (kléos, “glory”) but maybe it's not a fully correct one.

Every myth hides a core of one or more historical events. But he describes them overestimated and accepting the intervention of the gods. If we accept this basis, Hercules - if he existed - was certainly not a king.

Great video and great comments bellow... Aitiological myths, cultural appropriations, syncretisms , all happened so many times to justify political agendas. Old greeks loved the Iliad and Odissey as the Heracles's stories to identify themselves as greeks, rulers who wanted to rule or conquer greece needed to add this myth to their strategies ( so the kings of Macedonia and Epirus ... or some romans emperors like Commodus). Even novadays Rick Riordan 's first Percy Jackson novel justifies the birth of the new Zeus's son in the USA because the moving Olympus resettles itself where ever is the political hegemon of the "Western World"... Great Britain once had legitimate its own hegemony by its mythical ancestor Brutus of Troy... the merovingian kings shifted when needed from being the descendants of a germanic sea serpent then from the "roman friendly" Francion of Troy then from the christian friendly Sarah daughter of Jesus and Maria Magdalena and finally killed each others about from which branch of the dynasty they came... all myths don't need to be true in order to be used politically. So was Heracles a true mycenian or dorian greek king, general or sailor ? no need for him to become an efficient banner for all conquerors. of course each time he has been used there were few hints ( religious.literary.etymological) to be found for the believers to connect the dots and to persuade themselves of the veracity of the narrative and of the legitimacy of the political agenda. Conclusion : Heracles still live where he is loved !

Another great video. Thanks

I suspect that aspects of the Hercules story go back as far as the Proto Indo-Europeans. Other branches also had divine or semi-divine strong arm characters, viz. Thor/Donner; and I think there was a Celtic one as well but not so well recorded. It would not surprize me at all if there were similar Persian and Vedic characters.

Very cool thanks for sharing

The Etruscans have a mythical hero Hercle who is similar to Heracles but has some notable difference. Considering how different that language is and its connection to the island of Lemnos, we could see an oral tradition or possible a narrative arc for individuals to pursue.

It is entirely possible that some real military adventurer named Herakles existed and that with time the story was over embellished.

Absolute Glorious!

Great data

Looking forward to this one! 🧿🧿

its strange that Hera is part of his name, yet the stories say she was his enemy. It seems he was perhaps called that before Zeus became the king of gods at a time and place when Hera was dominant

I wonder how many of the exploits attributed to Herakles on African territory (Garden of the Hesperides, Pillars of Hercules, carrying the globe on his back instead of Atlas) should not rather be attributed to a resumption of legends attributed to the Punic Melqart and even possibly to local African divinities, with whom the Punics and then the Greeks would have identified their hero. I imagine that other local myths, Iberian, Greek, Asian, etc., would have also been reappropriated by the Punics, the Greeks or the Romans in the construction of their mythical figures.

I have the impression he was a mercenary/pirate/bandid that had a major role in the consolidation of the power of Mycenae over Thebes one or two generations before the Trojan War period. If the Piyamaradu of the hittite records was indeed Achilles, then judging by the name piyamaradu implies the servant of a female goddess thus it is a title, then there is an analogy in Heracles. It could be this is a title of a servant of a female goddess, and he actually had another personal name or names. This implies that warlords/mercenaries were viewed as servants of female goddess, possibly Athena (who we know from the trojan cycle myths had an antagonism with Hera and was a warfare goddess, warfare having a since of cunning and wisdom as a characteristic). We must have alternate views on the topics, thinking out of the box, when we deal with that era. It could be that mercenaries/pirates/bandits were following a cult of a female goddess, perhaps Potnia (that we can "safely" identify as Athena). Whereas kings, like the Mycenaean Wanax were worshiping Zeus a male god, exercising a paternalistic authority. We.muat not forget that titles like wanax and vasileus were also religious ones, as.we.can understand through mythology and later period history.

Hail Herakles!

Good video, but I always have to counter the use of BCE system over BC. Both are based aeound the same timeline and religious events, but one is just a hollow attempt to keep people from having to think of those events. BC is pre-Jesus and AD is lifetime and onward. BCE and CE use the same landmarks but are afraid to address the significance of their baseline "year zero". Its silly to just give the car a new paint job and claim that it is now a new car. If people want to throw Christianity away, come up with an original system at least to confuse us all with. This new eventful world of unraveling choas that we live in may give you plenty to work with.

Great video!

Heraklès and Perseus were the same character, based on the myth of Melkarth. The Greeks "pumped" this myth from the orientals, and change the version through time. ^^

Herakles was also deified by the Etruscans as Hercle. Did the Romans adopt Hercules from the Greeks or from the Etruscans?

I've always wondered whether these stories, Heracles, the Iliad, the Odyssey et cetera, have their origins in the Syro-Anatolian city states, while they briefly existed, after the Bronze Age collapse. Considering it was formed by Greeks, Syrians and Anatolians, post-collapse, it would've been the perfect melting pot for these people to have a meeting of minds and stories, recounting and inventing legendary events that framed all of their lives contemporaneously. (It's only a little bit north of Israel too where the story of Samson the Danite emerges!)

It is likely there was some historical person capable of extraordinary feats of strength but also with mental illness. And if that person was claimed ancestor for kings of Sparta, they would have every interest to keep story alive to legitimize themselves.

underated

There probably was a guy who did some really cool stuff, but then his stuff got exaggerated over time and equated with the gods.

Was Heracles/Hercules legendary personally i think not he is obviously of tall stature i myself is 6'4" a friend is 6'7" and a man i saw recently on YT is 6'10" he may have possibly been a giant too,His adventures point to a date of around 1900BC as he sacked Troy which thanks to recent excavations dates from 2250BC though Schliemann in his ignorance butchered the site dating evidence has been verified.

The notion of Greeks being ethnically homogenous and direct descendants of the Hellenes has been a persistent narrative, often used to foster a sense of unity and historical continuity. However, a closer examination reveals the complexity and diversity within the Greek population, challenging the simplistic portrayal of ethnic homogeneity and direct lineage from the ancient Hellenes. To begin with, Greece has been a crossroads of various civilizations throughout history, including interactions with Albanians, Romans, Byzantines, Ottomans, and others. This rich history of cultural exchanges has inevitably left an imprint on the ethnic composition of the region. Genetic studies indicate a diversity of influences, reflecting the historical interactions and migrations that have shaped the genetic makeup of the Greek people. This diversity challenges the notion of a singular, homogeneous ethnic origin. Moreover, the concept of ethnicity itself is complex and dynamic. It is not solely determined by genetic factors but is also influenced by cultural, linguistic, and historical elements. While the Hellenes were indeed one of the ancient tribes in the region, claiming a direct ethnic lineage from them oversimplifies the intricate processes of cultural assimilation, intermixing, and acculturation that have occurred over centuries. Language, often considered a key marker of ethnic identity, also presents complexities. The modern Greeks language belongs to the Indo-European family but is distinct within this linguistic group. While it has roots in the Hellenic language, linguistic evolution and influences from Latin, Slavic, and other languages have contributed to its unique character. This linguistic complexity challenges the notion of a straightforward, unbroken linguistic continuity between ancient Hellenic and modern Greek. Historical records further complicate the narrative of ethnic homogeneity. The region has witnessed migrations, invasions, and changes in political control, all of which have contributed to the diversity within the Greek population. The medieval period, for example, saw the influx of various groups, including Slavs and Normans, leaving lasting cultural and genetic impacts. In conclusion, the idea of Greeks being ethnically homogenous and direct descendants of the Hellenes is a simplistic narrative that does not fully capture the complexity of Greece's history and the diversity within its population. Genetic, linguistic, and historical evidence points to a more nuanced and multifaceted reality, highlighting the need to approach the question of Greek identity with a recognition of the intricate processes of cultural evolution and interaction that have shaped the region over millennia.

Hebe and Delilah are to be forgotten. Their existence destroys many progressive narratives.

Herakles later became as a title like Ceasar became a political axiom

Is it possible that thr Biblical figure of Samson was indeed a real person, as indicated by the Beit Shemesh seal and the Bible accurately describing Philistine temple architecture of the late Bronze age, and Herakles is an over-dramatization of Samson?

this gose deeper was perseus,theus,achilies and may of the other greek heros real or based on real people

The term Dark Ages to describe the period after the Late Bronze Age is falling out of fashion. Scholars more and more are just referring to it as the Early Iron Age or Iron Age.

wasn't Heracles a Dorian Hero ? that means that he was form the Blakans or even cenrtal Europe north to modern Greece

I'm descended from Hercules. He was Samson of the Bible, founder of the tribe of royals that ran Northern+Eastern Europe and Western Asia. The first king of Scythia! Spartans, Swedish of the Svear tribe, Scottish, Gaelic Irish, English of Anglian and Danish heritage, and of course the biggest clue that we are of the tribe of Dan, the Danish themselves who bear the image of Hercules on their national coat of arms and the namesake of our Jewish tribe, all the tribe of Dan. Fun facts, Hitler considered the tribe of Dan to be Aryan and not Jewish, and God allegedly wrote the Tribe of Dan out of the book of Revelations.

As historical as the cyclops and the 9 heads Hydra...

❤❤❤❤❤❤💪🏾🇰🇪🇰🇪

In my opinion he was named after Achilleus, the son of Zeus, who Achilles was also named after much later. And it's also my opinion that the name means "Eagle of Zeus". So in turn, the name Herakles means "High Eagle of Zeus". Just my two cents, but I think it makes more sense than Wikipedia's onomastics.

The myths of Heracles are to teach you things, not to take them literal. Don't watch too much tv

...Myth ...says who...???there is not smoke without a fire...!!! He even made it all the way to mexico...!!!

Nope he wasn’t real. He was a Greek Retelling and Euhemerization of a Sun God probably Shamesh and Horus and Melkart mixed together over time. When greek seafarers and soldiers and mercenaries traveled to other lands and learned other myths and stories they add them to their own eventually building a new Hero based on the past. Heracles conveniently fills the roles of older gods and adds things that other gods don’t have in the myths. I think that’s because he is an amalgamation of other gods but changed to fit the needs of the people of the early Iron Age.

Heracles myths are simply a reinterpretation of Phoenician myths of Melqart/Baal by the early Greeks.

The place called Greece never existed before as we know it today. The people who live in so called Greece today used to be called "Romej" during Byzantine Empire and "Raja" during Ottoman Empire times (except the Arvanitas who used to be called always by their name like "Albani", "Arbanoi", etc.) and the name "Greece" never existed during Byzantine times. During Ottoman times in the Balkans, after the big powers pushed for an uprising in the place that today is called "Greece", an independent country was formed in 1821-1832. The majority of the population there was of Arvanitas (and Chameria) stock, they also were the backbone of the uprising for independence from the Ottoman Empire. The rest of the minority population was of Slav, Turks and Aromanian stock. After the gain of independence the place was so divided, and with a prolonged civil war that a real country could not be formed. Fearing the disintegration of the place after Ottomans left (and possibility of a return of the Ottomans), Prince Otto of Germany was brought in by European powers to clear the mess and do nation - building there. He was proclaimed King of the place by big powers and given plenipotentiary powers. The Price Otto royal family in Germany happen to be an admirer of the ancient civilizations, one of them being the extinct ancient Greek civilization, traces and archeological findings of which are also seen in that region called today "Greece" as well. Being an ancient history romantic and buff, Otto came up with the idea, that the only way to keep the place together and for a chance to build a country there, was to adopt/impose some kind of neutral/foreign ancient language and culture for all people living in that place, that will make possible for the people to stick together under one language and culture imposed on them. So with a special royal decree, he proclaimed a version of the ancient Greek (the easier one to be taught and learned by people there in those times) as an official language of the place, and also came up with the new name for the place, calling it with a special royal decree "Greece". Everything else was banned, and the new "country" formed, was ordered to be rebuild anew in resemblance of the old romantic view of the ancient Greek civilization, starting with the buildings, names of people, places, cities and villages, regions, mountains, fields and all were changed to made-up names loaned by the ancient literature of ancient Greek civilization. This of course was associated with money brought by European powers to rebuild. The more people in that place agreed with the change of their true national and ethnic identity and declare themselves artificially "Greeks/Helenes" and adopt to the new order, the more money was to be pouring in. Naturally, the strongest resistance to this artificial and made-up solution, was made by the Arvanitas (and Chameria), but at no avail. It is legendary, the loss by one vote in the Price Otto's Parliament of that time, of Arvanitas proposal to have the Albanian (Arvanite) language as an official language of the place called 'Greece" today, and to call the new country "Arvanoi" (instead of "Greece"). There is plenty of scientific and factual evidence, archival and historical documents, as well as studies and publications by major authors and authorities in the field about as above. One interesting fact here, is that one of the earlier German/Austrian well known historians and scientists of that time, Fallmerayer, alerted Prince Otto and others to this nonsense, of declaring a whole people and place by a name not belonging to them, and injecting an extinct language, culture and civilization on people who had no idea about it and did not belong to it at all. By the way, Fallmerayer, is a banned figure and historian in what is called Greece today. Germany is still paying for the Otto's mistake, even today. It has gotten stuck with the country so called "Greece". It is now forced to pour free money, even today, out of Germany's pocket (through European Union as well) year after year to keep it alive and going, as this "Greece" cannot stand on its own. It is an artificial creation of Prince Otto's fantasy (a "zombie" country so to speak), and the new generations of the Germans and Europeans are continuing to pay the price for it. Moreover, what Prince Otto did back then, is tantamount to ethnic cleansing. He forced inhabitants of a whole region/place (called "Greece" today) to change by force their culture, language, national and ethnic identity to something else that those people were not, so they could artificially change in order to look modern and civilized (like ancient Greeks in Otto's personal view) and possibly be united. And of course, Arvanites and Chams (as the majority population in the region) suffered mostly from this ethnic cleansing. All this revelation, informs another major point: history taught about what today is called Greece, it appears to be taught wrong. People are wrongly taught in schools that today's Greece and its people are the direct descendants of ancient Greeks. Greece and Greeks of today, in some extend, also think they are superior to others just because they are called "Greeks" and their country "Greece" by decree (not by the virtue of the truth). They also seem to believe for some reason, they are entitled to the German and European money being handed out to them. The school textbooks and historiography should change, telling people the truth as it is. And with this, will come many other changes, in the way we see relations with the country called "Greece" today.

The Pelasgians were proto Albanians and were considered barbaric by Greeks. Pelasgian family lists languages in four groups, of which only Albanian is well-attested» Oxford University Linguistics “The speakers of the Indo-European language that would become Albanian and the speakers of the Indo-European language (Hellenic Albanian) that would become Modern Greek were the first to enter the Illyrian Peninsula whose languages are of relevance for modern Albanian linguistics.”: «Nonetheless, most historians have decided that the evidence linking Albanian to Messapic, which in turn has been linked to Illyrian, is sufficient to see Albanian as a descendant of a language to Illyrian, if not a descendant of Illyrian itself» It is argued that Albanian's affinities to the Messapic language proved that, at the very least, it was part of the same brandy as illyrian Also «traditionally scholars have seen the illyrians as the proto - albanians». By Budapest university in hungary: «The albanians are one of the most ancient people of southeast Europe; their ancestors were illyrians... From Linköping university: «order to understand the Albanian language, one must first understand this country’s history. Being one of the oldest peoples in the southeast Europe, Albanians have a formidable history dating back to the time of Alexander the Great but even further back via the history of their ancestors, the Illyrians via Pelasgians. Published by H. M. Stationary office in university of California «the albanians, skipetars, epirotes, dardanians are descendants of the ancient illyrians. This book is by university of california as you can see with the «univ calif» ok the Bottom of every page in the book. «While the strong men of Albania, like their ancestors Who lived before agamemnon» page 179 Also «the illyrian tribes, now represented by shkypetar or albanians» page 181. «by constantine A. Chekrezi, A. B. (Harv)» aka by Harvard university (best university in the world), also published in Columbia university as it also says. «It is generally recognized to-day that the albanians are the most ancient race in southeastern europe. All indications point to the fact that They are the descendants of the earliest pelasgians were represented in historical times by the kindred illyrians, macedonians.» in page 3. also «this (albanian) language is particularly interesting as the only surviving representative of the so called illyrian group of languages» in page 5. By University of NORTH Dakota: «the albanians are Among the oldest people of europe. Anciently their country formed a part of the roman provinces of illyria epirus». In page 1 By Colorado state university: «Archaeological excavations in central and northwest Greece have brought to light the cultural and skeletal remains of the ancient Illyrians» also: «the physical activity of the illyrians, ancient albanians...» both of these sentences is in page 1.

Here we go with a typical example of Western reductionism. The question is entirely moot and beside the point. It's a cosmic story about a hero who was an example of how man should be. It does not matter if he existed or not.

Greeks back their national sport, manipulating history again 😂

The notion of Greeks being ethnically homogenous and direct descendants of the Hellenes has been a persistent narrative, often used to foster a sense of unity and historical continuity. However, a closer examination reveals the complexity and diversity within the Greek population, challenging the simplistic portrayal of ethnic homogeneity and direct lineage from the ancient Hellenes. To begin with, Greece has been a crossroads of various civilizations throughout history, including interactions with Albanians, Romans, Byzantines, Ottomans, and others. This rich history of cultural exchanges has inevitably left an imprint on the ethnic composition of the region. Genetic studies indicate a diversity of influences, reflecting the historical interactions and migrations that have shaped the genetic makeup of the Greek people. This diversity challenges the notion of a singular, homogeneous ethnic origin. Moreover, the concept of ethnicity itself is complex and dynamic. It is not solely determined by genetic factors but is also influenced by cultural, linguistic, and historical elements. While the Hellenes were indeed one of the ancient tribes in the region, claiming a direct ethnic lineage from them oversimplifies the intricate processes of cultural assimilation, intermixing, and acculturation that have occurred over centuries. Language, often considered a key marker of ethnic identity, also presents complexities. The modern Greeks language belongs to the Indo-European family but is distinct within this linguistic group. While it has roots in the Hellenic language, linguistic evolution and influences from Latin, Slavic, and other languages have contributed to its unique character. This linguistic complexity challenges the notion of a straightforward, unbroken linguistic continuity between ancient Hellenic and modern Greek. Historical records further complicate the narrative of ethnic homogeneity. The region has witnessed migrations, invasions, and changes in political control, all of which have contributed to the diversity within the Greek population. The medieval period, for example, saw the influx of various groups, including Slavs and Normans, leaving lasting cultural and genetic impacts. In conclusion, the idea of Greeks being ethnically homogenous and direct descendants of the Hellenes is a simplistic narrative that does not fully capture the complexity of Greece's history and the diversity within its population. Genetic, linguistic, and historical evidence points to a more nuanced and multifaceted reality, highlighting the need to approach the question of Greek identity with a recognition of the intricate processes of cultural evolution and interaction that have shaped the region over millennia.