Etruscans (was: minimal pairs)

[Eduard Selleslagh]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Douglas G Kilday" <acnasvers at hotmail.com>
Sent: Friday, December 29, 2000 9:32 PM

> On 22 Dec 2000, Eduard Selleslagh wrote:

>> And the (in origin Anatolian) Etruscans are linguistically second cousins of
>> the Italic speaking peoples, so the search for the roots of the latter day
>> Antonii (etc...) risks becoming cyclical ('cercle vicieux').

> This is the second time in a month you have represented this flimsy
> hypothesis of Etruscans coming from Anatolia as though it were an
> established fact. If you actually have any non-cyclical arguments
> (preferably linguistic) in favor of an eastern homeland for the Etruscans,
> perhaps you could post them here or on the other list.

> Doug Kilday

> [ Moderator's note:
>   The hypothesis that the Etruscans may have originated in Anatolia appears
>   to be supported by the presence on the island of Lemnos of a stele
>   inscribed in a language clearly related to but differing from the Etruscan
>   of Italy.
>   --rma ]

[Ed Selleslagh]

I thought this was something of majority view. Of course, final proof is hard
to get by, and one should keep an open mind. I'll give you some arguments, but
I don't intend to start a new thread on this.

The moderator's note is indeed the main argument. The stele found near Kaminia
on Lemnos (by G. Cousin and F. Dürrbach in 1885) dates from the 6th or 7th c.
B.C. The spelling differences (with Etruscan) can probably be explained by the
different alphabet and the phonetic evolution during several centuries of
separation (the date of arrival of the Etruscan's forefathers is rather
unclear: the estimates vary from the 13th to the 6th c. B.C. But they seem to
have arrived after the Umbrians had already established themselves in the later
Etruria: the river now called Ombrone seems to bear their name). Example: Etr.
<auils> - Lemn. <awidz> (probably meaning 'year(s)').

The general aspect of the language is flecting, with elements that recall (P)IE
(e.g. -c, Lat. -que, Greek -te, but that could be contamination), but more
similar to e.g. Lydian (-l, -s genitives), apparently with a strong initial
accent and pileups of consonants. In short: like a cousin rather than a
descendant of ('narrow') PIE.

A few years ago, M. Carrasquer made a tentative family tree I will send you
privately since this list doesn't allow it.

There are also non-linguistic arguments, like the bronze liver of Piacenza,
used as a model by Etruscan fortune tellers, which has N. Mesopotamian
characteristics. Or the considerable Greek content of Etruscan culture.

Although this isn't really an argument, I would like to add this:

It is possible that the Eneid (Aeneis) is at least in part based upon the
actual voyage of the Etruscans' forefathers to Italy, but that is only an
educated guess. Anyway, the route is about right, and the fantasy world it
depicts in places sounds like that of Jason's voyage to the Black Sea, or the
Odyssee. And its source is popular Roman tradition, that speaks of a landing of
a people on or near the Latium coast; Etruscan Caere (now Cerveteri) is not far
from Rome, and the earliest known rulers of Rome (itself an Etruscan name:
Ruma) were the Etruscan kings. So, it is entirely possible, even likely, that
the Romans confounded Etruscans and Italic peoples of the earliest period
covered by tradition.

All this means is that probably some people from the north-eastern
Mediterranean arrived in Latium or thereabout in or before the earliest days of
the Roman tradition.

Ed.