ABSTRACT
We have left many parts of Europe hovering on the threshold of history. By the end of the Late Bronze Age we are able to speculate with some pretension at accuracy on the identity of many of the peoples of eastern, southern and even central Europe. Within two centuries they were starting to emerge into the relative light of historical day. By that time they were mostly using iron as a primary material for tools, and as such do not concern us here. In no case do we have any definite historical records of European peoples-outside the Aegean area-in the period before iron-using became standard. From written sources in the eastern Mediterranean we may catch glimpses of possible non-Greek Europeans, but they are no more than glimpses: the Shardana, the Shekeresh and others ( ?Sardinians, Sikels), who formed part of the confederation of 'Peoples ofthe Sea' responsible for so much destruction in the Near East around 1200 B c. 1
Apart from this we have to depend on later classical sources which speak of barbarian tribes or groups of tribes, mostly on the fringes of the classical world but in some cases extending far beyond it. Chief among these are the Illyrians and the Celts, both of whom we know were present in central and southern Europe early in the Iron Age. We have touched on the possible reasons for attributing them to an earlier period, but certainty is unfortunately not within our reach. It seems possible that all of them reached their later positions at much the same time, in a 'migration of peoples' ; but the archaeological record is powerless to speak more precisely of the date of such a migration. The most commonly accepted hypothesis is that the period of turmoil in the historical areas - the Aegean, Anatolia, the Levant and Egypt - might also be a troubled time for the barbarian world, that is, from the mid-thirteenth century BC on; it is tempting to see a causal connection between the supposed events in each area. If movements of peoples did take place around this time - which is possible, but hardly susceptible of proof - then most of the
534Conclusion UrnfieldperiodincontinentalEuropemusthavebeenoccupiedbyCelts, Illyriansandthenumerousothertribalgroupingswhoappearsubsequently.Thisisthelikeliesttheory;wouldthatthearchaeologicalrecord couldsupplyclearproofthatitreallywasso.
