Pelasgians

[Pantagathus]

Yes..I was wondering that because I recently read an essay by someone in which he wrote a lot of rather improbable theories about Vesta and the Etruscan Pantheon..(in a desperate attempt to demonstrate the common Pelasgian origin of certain Greeks and the Etruscans, due to the fact that the Etruscan alphabet was similar to the archaic Greek one). Besides, as far as I know the Etruscan language was non Indo-European, whereas the [classic] Greek is Indo-European. I'm sure that's revisionism. At first I thought his argumentations were quite convincing, that's why I asked about the simultaneous spread of the cult, but later comparing other sources it came out how wrong that whole text is. Vesta's origins can't be non Indo-European.. I'd like to slap myself for taking that stuff seriously lol. I should stop reading that sort of stuff and surrender to the fact the origins of the Etruscans are unknown.

 

Don't be too harsh on yourself...

 

Everybody gets so caught up on the 'Indo-Europeans' which now seems to be more just a language spread than a racial one.

 

Current Genetic Geneography seems to finally provide the connection between Asia Minor, The Pelasgians & the Etruscans. That connection is Y Chromosome haplogroup J2 (M172). The account that Herodotus told of their Lydian origins now seems to not be mutually exclusive with the Pelasgian origins of the Etruscans. People have just never looked far enough back.

 

It appears now that ~ 4th Millennia BC there was a terrible drought in Asia Minor that sent those people scrambling for new lands. All of a sudden people the Vinca culture blossoms in the Balkins, the Nurghic culture appears in Sardina, Minoan civilization appears and so do the proto-Etruscans. All have similar cult iconography and mythic themes.

 

Now, J2 (M172) is found in the same frequency in all these areas with the ground zero being Asia Minor. ***Edit - The Sub Group (of the aforementioned J2) representative of the Etruscans should probably be pointed out to be J2e1 (M102)***

 

How do you connect the dots?

[Silentium]

I too would like to know the ultimate origins of the Etruscans. If they came from Asia Minor perhaps there is some truth in the Aeneas myth.

Indeed. After all there's always a bit of truth behind every legend =)

 

Current Genetic Geneography seems to finally provide the connection between Asia Minor, The Pelasgians & the Etruscans. That connection is Y Chromosome haplogroup J2 (M172). The account that Herodotus told of their Lydian origins now seems to not be mutually exclusive with the Pelasgian origins of the Etruscans. People have just never looked far enough back.

 

It appears now that ~ 4th Millennia BC there was a terrible drought in Asia Minor that sent those people scrambling for new lands. All of a sudden people the Vinca culture blossoms in the Balkins, the Nurghic culture appears in Sardina, Minoan civilization appears and so do the proto-Etruscans. All have similar cult iconography and mythic themes.

 

Now, J2 (M172) is found in the same frequency in all these areas with the ground zero being Asia Minor.

 

How do you connect the dots?

This is VERY interesting!Do you have any sources to have more in depth information? Like books (hopefully reliable ones) or anything else?

It's true, we tend to see things from a merely linguistic perspective and tend to analyse and take into consideration only written texts to prove connections, whereas maybe other sciences would be more helpful..

If this was confirmed a lot of things could be explained. =)

[Skarr]

The Etruscans did use the Greek alphabet but their grammar and sentence structure was entirely different, a completely different language.

 

I personally think the Etruscans were migrating tribes from the huge grain basket of the steppes, as this would have been the first gathering place for humans as they came out of the ice age and settled down at specific places to pursue agriculture. Once humans began settling in one spot and using that as a permanent base, I think they also began to develop ways of communicating with each other and possibly used common symbols (like the letters in an alphabet) but combined them in different ways to mean different things, as they all came from various cultures. Maybe there was a partnership, a sharing of knowledge that briefly took place before the abundant times ran out.

 

Once population exploded and resources became scarce, wars and conflict would break out, with the removal or destruction or migration of those societies which were weaker than the others.

 

The Kurgans and the Pelasgians probably migrated to Greece, with maybe a mix of them finding their way to northern Italia, where they would become known as the Etruscans.

 

It is a very challenging period to understand - between 5000 to say 1000 BC, as there are not many records which exist of the various migrations of people from one part of the globe to the other. I'm sure these migrations took place over generations and on a mass scale. One has to only look at the South American tribes and even those in the North and how they originally must have come from this 'grain basket' in Asia Minor where humans who survived the ice age may have congregated.

 

There are, I'm sure many cities buried under the sands of the Gobi desert and other remote places in Central Asia.

[Pantagathus]

This is VERY interesting!Do you have any sources to have more in depth information? Like books (hopefully reliable ones) or anything else?

It's true, we tend to see things from a merely linguistic perspective and tend to analyse and take into consideration only written texts to prove connections, whereas maybe other sciences would be more helpful..

If this was confirmed a lot of things could be explained. =)

 

Silentium,

 

I'll try to put together a bibliography of sorts if you'd like. This hypothesis (linking the diaspora from Asia Minor to the 4th Millennia) isn't really found yet in academic circles... However, I guaranty that this isn't 'tin foil hat' assertions. As for the scientific conclusion between the genetic affinity with modern Turkish & North African populations I refer you here: The Etruscans: A Population Genetic Study (Beware... Thick with jargon!)

 

Genetic Geneology is a rather new science and the tools are changing monthly. Not many people are applying it yet to multidisciplined approaches in an effort to solve old mysteries like this. I started working on this particular research about a month ago. To come to this conclusion I have used:

 

Myth:

Typhons 'Attack'

Leto's giving birth to Apollo & Artemis

Myths associated with the peopling of Sardinia

Myths associated with the peopling of Crete

Anecdotes by Pausanias

 

Ancient History:

Herodotus' accounts dealing with the Etruscans & Pelasgians

Anecdotes by Pliny

Anecdotes by Strabo

Anecdotes by Diodorus

Anecdotes by Pausanias

 

Archaeology:

Excavations of Catal Huyuk in Asia Minor (7th-5th Millennia BC)

Excavations in regards to the Vinca Culture (Balkins - 4th Millennia BC) ***Tartaria Tablet***

Excavations in regards to the Ozieri Culture (Pre-Nurghic Sardinia - 4th Millennia BC)

Excavations at Knossoss (Crete - 4th/3rd Millennia BC)

Excavations at Tarquinia (Etruscan Tombs)

Excavations at Caere (Etruscan Tombs)

 

Geology:

Climatric Catastrophy studies focused on 4th Millennia BC Asia Minor (Lake Van)

 

Genetic Geneology (Studies on Frequecy Distribution of Haplogroups):

J2e1 (M102)*

J2 (M172)

 

Religion - Cult iconography & 'origins' of:

Neolithic 'Mother Goddes' (Leto)

Dionysus - 'Fufluns'

Apollo - 'Aplu'

Artemis - 'Artumes/Artini'

Hermes - 'Turms'

Heracles - 'Horcle/Hercle'

(One of the key links through these is the iconography of the Bull & Leopard. The leopard {whom was Dionysus' companion} was perticulary 'revered' in Catal Huyuk, Asia Minor {where they still were found in the Neolithic}, the skin of which seems to have been the primary ceremonial garb for those people)

 

Really. modern, multidisciplined approachs are the only way to get to the bottom of old mysteries. Myth, ancient history, archaeology, geology, religion and liguistics are all needed to even come close to acceptable conclusions.

 

Hope this gives you more comfort in accepting my assertions.

[Silentium]

Silentium,

 

I'll try to put together a bibliography of sorts if you'd like. This hypothesis (linking the diaspora from Asia Minor to the 4th Millennia) isn't really found yet in academic circles... However, I guaranty that this isn't 'tin foil hat' assertions. As for the scientific conclusion between the genetic affinity with modern Turkish & North African populations I refer you here: The Etruscans: A Population Genetic Study (Beware... Thick with jargon!)

 

Really. modern, multidisciplined approachs are the only way to get to the bottom of old mysteries. Myth, ancient history, archaeology, geology, religion and liguistics are all needed to even come close to acceptable conclusions.

 

Hope this gives you more comfort in accepting my assertions.

Of course!Thanks for posting the link, I absolutely didn't know universities of Ferrara and Florence were behind the project. That was exactly what I was looking for, I went through the whole article (skipping the technical jargon hehe ) and I found it incredible. I'm aware that we can't take anything for granted and that there's a long way to go, but the fact that now we can say "the links between Etruscans and eastern Mediterranean regions were in part associated with genetic -and not only cultural- exchanges" is a huge step ahead =). It seems that -genetically speaking- an Etruscan had more in common with the Turks than with contemporary Italians, for example (except for the Tuscans, of course). Oh, and your sources (with particular reference to historical and archaeological ones) are reliable if used in support of the previously posted genetic analysis and are more or less the same mentioned in other researches on the subject I had read, probably with the sole addition of Myrsilus of Methymna. It was also nice to see that the article mentioned the different versions of Dionysus and Herodotus. At least now we know they might have been both wrong, although Herodotus was probably closer

[Viggen]

It seems that -genetically speaking- an Etruscan had more in common with the Turks than with contemporary Italians, for example (except for the Tuscans, of course).

 

Hmm, as far as i know there were no Turkic people in todays Turkey during the time of the Etruscan Period...

 

regards

viggen

[Silentium]

It seems that -genetically speaking- an Etruscan had more in common with the Turks than with contemporary Italians, for example (except for the Tuscans, of course).

 

Hmm, as far as i know there were no Turkic people in todays Turkey during the time of the Etruscan Period...

 

regards

viggen

No, the analysis takes into consideration "actual"(modern) Turks (among with North Africans and several other populations that I don't remember, you have to go through the article to find them)

[Viggen]

Seljuk Turks invaded Asia Minor only in the 11th century (at least 1000 years after the etruscans dissapeared, right?) , so if i understand this correct, although 1000 years of turkic rule, those people still have the genetic footprint of people that lived 2000 years prior? interessting...

 

regards

viggen

[Favonius Cornelius]

It is a very challenging period to understand - between 5000 to say 1000 BC, as there are not many records which exist of the various migrations of people from one part of the globe to the other. I'm sure these migrations took place over generations and on a mass scale. One has to only look at the South American tribes and even those in the North and how they originally must have come from this 'grain basket' in Asia Minor where humans who survived the ice age may have congregated.

 

It seems like that period is chuck full of migrations in all parts of the world, and then when you have recorded history going, not many more migrations aside from the steppe peoples. Would it be correct to say that these 5000-1000 BC migrations were due wholly to the lifestyle of these peoples, almost hunter/gatherer in nature, or is 'migration' a historian's cop-out to explain something he just has no clue about?

[Skarr]

Favonius, recorded history is shorter and really authentic sources, even shorter.

 

History is like one big puzzle that has to be put together based on the surviving fragments and full stops recorded on the way. By this I mean, you know the exact date of an event based on historical accounts and perhaps you can even place individuals like Caesar, Pompey etc. at the scene. However, there is a lot of gray muck on what brought them to that point or what happened immediately thereafter.

 

For example, we know that certain civilizations developed in the Americas and that these people were originally from Europe or Asia. When the crossing / migration occurred, however, is a pure guess as there is no evidence. We can only speculate that they crossed over the Bering Strait and basically just walked from point A to B. It may have taken not only some years but also generations for them to reach the southern most tip of South America, a long migration that perhaps spanned a few centuries.

 

I would guess that most of these tribes were nomadic, moving from one food source to another and hadn't really mastered agriculture, like they did in Egypt and Mesopotamia and in civilizations along the Indus river in what is today's India / Pakistan. They would have been following the gathering / hunting lifestyle, which the Germanic tribes continued to follow until the Romans absorbed them. Basically, these tribes would settle in a region and soon enough, within one or two generations, the entire land around them would be laid waste and once they would run out of resources, they would simply load the wagons and move to 'greener' pastures.

[Pantagathus]

Seljuk Turks invaded Asia Minor only in the 11th century (at least 1000 years after the etruscans dissapeared, right?) , so if i understand this correct, although 1000 years of turkic rule, those people still have the genetic footprint of people that lived 2000 years prior? interessting...

 

regards

viggen

 

For the most part Viggen, the answer is yes.

 

In fact it's not uncommon for >60% of a given population in the old world to have genetic markers constant for 10,000 years...

 

Perfect example is Spain, the Phoenician/Punic colonial influence which is primarily representative in the modern population by the presence of Haplogroup J. The frequency of that Haplogroup in the modern population is less that 10% (or there abouts) and is clustered where you would expect. (Costa del Sol, Adalusia, etc..)

 

The dominant Y-Chromosome Haplogroup in Spain is M343(R1b) and is found at the astounding frequency of 80%-90% of the modern population with the highest concentrations radiating out from the south slopes of the Pyrennes (i.e. Basque country). What I mean by astounding is that this genetic legacy goes back to when people carrying this very ancient genetic marker took up refuge in Iberia during the last glacial maximum. So the Romans, the Alans/Vandals & the Moors barely made a dent in the genetics of the indigenous population all the way into the modern age!

 

Furthermore, the biggest consequence from this data is that the whole presumption a 'Celtic' invasion of Iberia during the 1st Millennia BC is rubbish as is the presumtion that the Celtiberians were racially different from the southern Iberians & the Lusitanians. There may have been an encrouchment of Celtic culture into Iberia when the Iberians in the north possibly adopted a Celtic 'Lingua Franca' from their trading partners, but there was no mass movement of people that caused a north & south genetic divide in Spain during the 1st Millennia...

 

I hope that makes sense

[Onasander]

As well as the Roman-Trojan story....kinda.

 

 

A little brainstoriming here:

Are their any tell-tale socio-historical or archiological signals that allows someone to to judge if an ancient race/culture willing or unwillingly accepts the culture of another.

 

For being conquered within literate societies. the exsistance of monuments or inscriptions would be a dead giveaway. Money, both Greek in Etruscan lands as well as Vice Versa, would be another example.

 

A change in religion but not one in culture, or again, vice versa, keeping the old religion by changing the economy, can be another signal they willingly adopted the hellenizing influence.

 

I really think we are looking in the wrong place for the Etruscan origins, the Etruscans might not be Hellenic Refugees, but rather, seasonal invaders of Greek or Macedonian lands during the Greek dark ages. Thier written language may very well be what was then the court (or religious) language of a few frienge barbarian groups who learned to write centuries before by the Ancient Greeks, and never properly synthitized the letters with thier spoken tongue. I highly doubt they took thier knowledge of writting directly from the greeks.

 

Really, does anyone else find it unusual that a urbanized society could so easily arise in one of the most invasion prone areas of the earth.... while maintaining it's tribal city-state structure and culture? That's my guess, a weak confederacy defensively that occasionally attacked wealth neighboring states when thier ability to strike was weak, taking back home knowldge as well as plunder. The Roman meantality was exactly the same as theirs, cept they had to be much more agressive in it's execution since their was more of Etruscan than Roman in the world, and was able to codify this urgency into thier national character in thier earliest days. The roman knack for architecture as well as warfare would be a perfect example of this; urgency and adaptability.

[Ancestor]

To have a better idea about the Pelasgians, I think that it's better to find and to read the book: "Enigma" by Robert d'Ang

[Ancestor]

The Pelasgian Problem.

 

"...The most significant among Hellenes are Athenians and Lacaedemonians. The first come from Ionic tribe, the second - from Doric tribe. And, Ionians are of Pelasgian origin, and Dorians - of Hellenic." (I, 56.)

 

This message belongs to Herodot, who wrote his "Historia" in the 5th century B.C. Pelasgians are so often met in different Ancient Greek manuscripts that we do not practically doubt they lived in Greece. The most widespread theory in ancient times was that Pelasgians were the Pre-Greek population of Southern Balkans and the Aegean Islands. Greek authors placed their native land in Fessalia, in Northern and Middle Greece, and on the majority of islands in the Aegean Sea.

 

According to Greeks, in the 5th and in the 4th century B.C. Pelasgians still lived in some regions of Greece, on several islands, and spoke a language Hellenes could not understand. Later they were assimilated completely, leaving practically no inscriptions, no books, no signs of their language in Greece, just some descriptions Greeks made themselves after them.

 

http://indoeuro.bizland.com/archive/article4.html