Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

turks and etruscans are TROAN?

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 12>
Author
finikis View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 06-Oct-2005
Location: Belgium
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 76
  Quote finikis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: turks and etruscans are TROAN?
    Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 08:55

This subject is verypopular in last times..i found this genetic results..i wonder if there is someone in AE can give more info to us..

http://sophistikatedkids.com/turkic/34Etruscans/EtruskGeneti csEn.htm



Edited by finikis
Back to Top
Attila2 View Drop Down
Pretorian
Pretorian
Avatar

Joined: 03-Oct-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 154
  Quote Attila2 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 09:30

think its too unaccurate

Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 09:56
I read the title and thought: what nonsense now? But actually the study is good and interesting.

On one side it's been speculated for long that Etruscans might come from the region of Troy: the fact that Lemnians spoke and wrote in an Etruscan dialect, the fact that their culture shows some striking resemblances with that of Minoan Crete, some classical sources suggesting that they came from Lydia and the fact that Romans kept a tradition of Troyan ascendency via Eneas (probably borrowed from Etruscans, who ruled Rome for some time) all pointed in that direction.

Yet the archaelogical sequence shows continuity for Etruscan settlements since 1300 BCE, this and other factors caused some to believe that they were actually native from Italy.

The truth may be somewhere in the middle: the ruling class and its language could come from Anatolia or other Aegean areas, while the mass of the population could be native. This would explain what the authors of the study find puzzling:


As for the second question, which concerned the genetic relationships between the Etruscans and modern populations, various tests show that the Tuscans are the Etruscans' closest neighbors in terms of genetic distances. Despite that broad similarity, however, Etruscans and Tuscans share only two haplotypes. This finding is difficult to interpret (...)

Social structure may have affected these results. All skeletons we typed were found in tombs containing artifacts that could be attributed with confidence to the Etruscan culture. Those tombs typically belong the social elites (Barker and Rasmussen 1998), and so the individuals we studied may represent a specific social group, the upper classes. We do not know whether that group differed genetically from the rest of the population, which might be the case when a foreign elite imposes its rule, and often its language, over a region (Renfrew 1989). If the upper class had indeed somewhat distinct DNAs, our results could mean that this elite class became largely extinct, while the rest of the population, whose DNA we do not know, may well have contributed to the modern gene pool of Tuscany. (...)


Anyhow the study does seem to prove an Anatolian or Aegean connection to the Etruscan elites, whose remains have been analyzed.

But the title of this topic (Turks and Italians are TROYAN) may be too far from reality. If you read the main table:



... you realize that modern Italians are not Turk (just about 10%) but actually Basque

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
finikis View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 06-Oct-2005
Location: Belgium
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 76
  Quote finikis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 10:03

so i have to change topic etruscans and turks

so what do u think about the site informaion? are the referances enough?

Back to Top
Alkiviades View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 01-Sep-2005
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 469
  Quote Alkiviades Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 10:16

Ah, more "aren't XYZ really Turks"!

I am developing a certain fondness on that kind of topics... can anyone actually make a list with the nations our resident Turanists claim- by posting a relevant topic -  to be Turks?

I find those topics very amusing - over at the FinnsarereallyTurks  topic I ROFL throughout the whole seven pages.

I think genetic studies are extremely flawed because they deal with non-homogenous populations anyway. Todays Turks are perhaps the most intermixed nation in this (heavily intermixed anyway) corner of world that is the southeastern Europe. How can one find "Turkish" genes, when Turks themselves seem to be a cocktail of Turkish, Anatolian, Greek, Arabic, Slavic, Albanian, Egyptian, Iranian and a host of other elements adding to the pool? Finding "Turks" in Italy only proves what common sense tells us: that the Italian gene pool is just as intermixtured as any other in the region.

 

Back to Top
finikis View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 06-Oct-2005
Location: Belgium
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 76
  Quote finikis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 10:27

i am in research of the relationship with  troians romans and turks?i just want to know more..i found interesting things  from ottoman and roman archives..i will share them with u later...

actually i believe that byzantine is not the continuation of roman empire..

i am waiting your rewiews..i know i am not enough but sure u can help..

Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 10:30
Originally posted by finikis

so i have to change topic etruscans and turks

so what do u think about the site informaion? are the referances enough?



It is a serious and interesting study. It only deals with MtDNA but it is significative and interesting anyhow.

I personally like it because it seems to confirm my own preferential hypothesis of Etruscans and pre-Greek Aegeans (Troyans possibly) being related.

Notice anyhow that prior to Etruscan developement as nation/culture, cultural influences from the Aegean are obvious in southern and central Italy throught the Chalcolithic and Early Bronze Age. Nothing very spectacular, as Italy was rather undeveloped then but a clear continuous influence.

NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 10:41
Originally posted by Alkiviades

Ah, more "aren't XYZ really Turks"!

I am developing a certain fondness on that kind of topics... can anyone actually make a list with the nations our resident Turanists claim- by posting a relevant topic -  to be Turks?

I find those topics very amusing - over at the FinnsarereallyTurks  topic I ROFL throughout the whole seven pages.


You're sick man. I just can't bear the hyper-agressive-nationalism portrayed in such topics, most of the time with no grounds at all. A little bit of friendly national pride or nationalist kidding is ok but that's pure a-scientifical hooliganism and actually hurts and may even scare more serious members with much to offer.

I decided not to look at that specific "Finnish are Turks" topic and it always surprised me that t was on top. I think it's been finally locked - surely for good reasons.

I think genetic studies are extremely flawed because they deal with non-homogenous populations anyway. Todays Turks are perhaps the most intermixed nation in this (heavily intermixed anyway) corner of world that is the southeastern Europe. How can one find "Turkish" genes, when Turks themselves seem to be a cocktail of Turkish, Anatolian, Greek, Arabic, Slavic, Albanian, Egyptian, Iranian and a host of other elements adding to the pool? Finding "Turks" in Italy only proves what common sense tells us: that the Italian gene pool is just as intermixtured as any other in the region.

Well, genetic studies are interesting. They have some limitations but they are a true new branch of bio-archaeology.

I'm not sure but I think that, in relation with most European populations, "Turk" genes can be seen as a pole: that carrying the most SW Asian genes. In this particular case it is relevant as the hypothesis is that Etruscans came from Anatolia, so considering Turkey as one of the "parents" makes sense. It has nothing to do with that Turan madness but actually with pre-Turkic populations, from which most modern Turks descend directly.

It is more relevant in this case because ancient Etruscan aristocrats had a big deal of Anatolian blood, or so it seems.


NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
finikis View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 06-Oct-2005
Location: Belgium
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 76
  Quote finikis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 10:55

maju is it possible that after troian wars the anatolian groups to west(etruscans) and east(turks)?because in middle asia we can not see any turkish existence before this process.later turks came back to anatolia but of course thay have mixed with sw asians...but it is interesting to see still their genetics are similar.and languages of etruscans and turks are non-undo european.

Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 13:00
No, I don't think that Trojans and Turks have any relation other than the fact that former Anatolians, including whatever was left of Trojans, now speak Turk.

Turks come from Central Asia where they probably migrated from further east or rather northeast at the end of the 2nd milennium BCE, displacing the previous IE populations (and probably mixing with them too). They migrated to SW Asia in historical times (after 1000 CE), most likely with the Mongol hordes initially. Here they soon became Caucasian in aspect.

This has nothing to do with Etruscans: because when Etruscans migrated from Anatolia or Aegean, there were no Turks there. Etruscan is a dead language but it is also a well known language (their script is precursor of our Latin alphabet, so reading it is no mistery), yet no relative apart of Lemnian and ancient Rhaetian have been found.

Late Etruscan Alphabet:



Compare with Ancient Latin Alphabet:


You can find Etruscan texts online at http://etp.classics.umass.edu/

A very comprehensive site on Etruscans is http://www.mysteriousetruscans.com/ (they have even a forum too)


NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
finikis View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 06-Oct-2005
Location: Belgium
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 76
  Quote finikis Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 18:21

ok one more thing!in old icaland dictionaries turk=troian

 

Back to Top
turkos View Drop Down
Janissary
Janissary


Joined: 04-Aug-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
  Quote turkos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 18:43
this subject was talked too much last year in turkey.professor haluk ahin showed many reasons turks to be troian(=luvians=hitittes) as their culture languages vs...fatih sultan mehmed sent a letter to vatican asks why romans(italians) behave us like an enemy as our brothers and coming from same blood.. he wants from romans to stop being like greeks. then in 1453 before conquiering of istanbul he came to anakkale(troy)with his army and he sweared to take revenge of hector.in ww1 ataturk did the same thing.haluk ahin believes that luvians and hitittes went to east in a leadership of general turcus and to west with paris.i will try to find these in english.
dont forget all events are repeating
Back to Top
SearchAndDestroy View Drop Down
Caliph
Caliph
Avatar

Joined: 15-Aug-2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2728
  Quote SearchAndDestroy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 23:52

I'm not starting a flame war here, but it seems everytime I go on these forums another nationalitity seems to become Turk. How wide is the genetics considered for Turks, because it seems like it's becoming half of the world...

As for Romans to be Italian, one of the most famous Romans Augustus has blonde hair. Are there alot of Turks with blonde hair? I'm serous about this question, not asking this in a offensive way to start a flame war. I mean Romans were a lighter skin tone from what I understand, and from what people tell me Roman blood is pretty much non-existant in Italy now from all the genetics that came in.

"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey
Back to Top
Alkiviades View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 01-Sep-2005
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 469
  Quote Alkiviades Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Oct-2005 at 01:23
Maju,

From the source you used you didn't quite read the text accompanying the alphabet graphs or you chose to ignore it?

The Etruscan alphabet developed from a Western variety of the Greek alphabet brought to Italy by Euboean Greeks. The earliest known inscription dates from the middle of the 6th century BC. Most Etruscan inscriptions are written in horizontal lines from left to right, but some are boustrophedon (running alternately left to right then right to left).

More than 10,000 Etruscan inscriptions have been found on tombstones, vases, statues, mirrors and jewellery. Fragments of a Etruscan book made of linen have also been found. Etruscan texts can be read: i.e. the pronunciation of the letters is known, though scholars are not sure what all the words mean.

No major literary works in Etruscan have survived, however there is evidence for the existence of religious and historical literature and drama. It is also possible that the Etruscan have a notation system for music.

The Etruscan language was spoken by the Etruscans in Etruria (Tuscany and Umbria) until about the 1st century AD, after which it continued to be studied by priests and scholars. The emperor Claudius (10 BC - 54 AD) wrote a history of the Etruscans in 20 volumes, none of which have survived, based on sources still preserved in his day. The language was used in religious ceremonies until the early 5th century.

Etruscan is related to Raetic, a language once spoken in the Alps, and also to Lemnian, once spoken on the island of Lemnos. It was also possibly related to Camunic, a language once spoken in the northwest of Italy.


The Etruscan language cannot be traced in evidence before the 8th century (some would say 7th century). If an anatolian migration to Italy resulted to the Etruscans (as a ruling class or as the main population) it would have been a 12th or more likely 13th century BC phenomen, when this alphabet was non-existent. The Etruscan alphabet is just the Chalkidean alphabet adopted to their tongue.

Also, the migration hypothesis is solely based on a myth and no actual data (besides very vague and easily explainable in other context genetic studies) is there to prove that the Etruscans had anything to do with Asia Minor.

The migration hypothesis is not valid scientifically unless some sort of actual proof is found to support it. For the time being, claiming that Etruscans=Trojans is not a valid claim by no means.

Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Oct-2005 at 02:11
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy

I'm not starting a flame war here, but it seems everytime I go on these forums another nationalitity seems to become Turk. How wide is the genetics considered for Turks, because it seems like it's becoming half of the world...


As I said before the title of the topic is misleading: Turks, understood as Turkic-speaking people, only exist in Anatolia since about 1000 years back in time. Yet they are gentically descendants mostly of the native peoples of Anatolia, including Trojans.

A much better title for this topic would be ETRUSCANS WERE TROJANS, or something in this line.

As for Romans to be Italian, one of the most famous Romans Augustus has blonde hair. Are there alot of Turks with blonde hair?

There are a lot of Italians with blonde or fair hair, specially in the North. Notice that Latins (at least their elites: the Patricians) had arrived to the region rather recently (c. 1300 BCE), probably from Bavaria and Austria.

Anyhow, there are many Greek and Turks with fair features. Black hair and Mediterranean type is dominant but by no means exclussive. Anatolia is also a mixed region.

Anyhow, how do you know that Augustus had blonde hair? Most Roman mosaics (which, unlike statues, have color) depict rather dark haired peoples, the same happens with Etruscans.

I'm serous about this question, not asking this in a offensive way to start a flame war. I mean Romans were a lighter skin tone from what I understand, and from what people tell me Roman blood is pretty much non-existant in Italy now from all the genetics that came in.

It could well be if you mean Roman Patrician blood. Yet, you should find and post the relevant study, as Alkiviades did. Else, I will keep thinking it's a Hollywod myth.


NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
Maju View Drop Down
King
King
Avatar

Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
  Quote Maju Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Oct-2005 at 02:34
Originally posted by Alkiviades

Maju,

From the source you used you didn't quite read the text accompanying the alphabet graphs or you chose to ignore it?


I did read it but instead of copying and pasting, I made a synthesis in a single sentence.

The Etruscan language cannot be traced in evidence before the 8th century (some would say 7th century). If an anatolian migration to Italy resulted to the Etruscans (as a ruling class or as the main population) it would have been a 12th or more likely 13th century BC phenomen, when this alphabet was non-existent. The Etruscan alphabet is just the Chalkidean alphabet adopted to their tongue.

True about the alphabet. On the migration, what is clear is that the culture of Vilanova (since 1300 BCE) is already there in the same settlements and with the prototypes of what would be the Etruscan culture we know about. There's no break-up in Tuscany since 1300.

Also, the migration hypothesis is solely based on a myth and no actual data (besides very vague and easily explainable in other context genetic studies) is there to prove that the Etruscans had anything to do with Asia Minor.

As I said before, both theories: that of Asian origin and that of native Italian origina have existed since ancient times. The presence of the Lemnian language is highly striking, as it's clear that, like Italian Etruscans, Lemnian ones were there since always (as far as memory could recall). Lemnians used Greek alphabet and not Etruscan one, what means that probably they hadn't migrated from Italy, at least in literary times. The fact that Lemnos is right in front of where Troy once stood adds weight to the Trojan connection.

The migration hypothesis is not valid scientifically unless some sort of actual proof is found to support it. For the time being, claiming that Etruscans=Trojans is not a valid claim by no means.

Well, I'd say the opposite: the study you presented does actually seem to prove that the etruscan elite came from Anatolia, reinforcing a lot the Trojan or Pelasgian hypothesis. They don't need to come directly from the city of Troy, just from any nearby pre-Greek population.

Look at Cretan hairdress and Etruscan early hairdress: they are identical. Look at the position of women in Etruscan and Cretan civilizations. Then look at hairdress and position of women in IE Roman and Greek cultures: it's "another planet". Something deep in culture has changed with the arrival of the new Patriarchal warriors.


NO GOD, NO MASTER!
Back to Top
Alkiviades View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 01-Sep-2005
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 469
  Quote Alkiviades Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Oct-2005 at 03:09

Originally posted by Maju

I did read it but instead of copying and pasting, I made a synthesis in a single sentence.

Not quite. You suggested, between the lines, that the Anatolian hypothesis is emphasized by the alphabet, while the passage (and what we know generally) points out in the most resolute way that the Etruscan alphabet was adopted by Chalkidean (that is Greek) settlers/traders when they made contact with the Etruscans in late 8th, early 7th century.

True about the alphabet. On the migration, what is clear is that the culture of Vilanova (since 1300 BCE) is already there in the same settlements and with the prototypes of what would be the Etruscan culture we know about. There's no break-up in Tuscany since 1300.

I am aware of that. Meaning, that any migration should have occured rather in the 14th century BC ...not very likely, wouldn't you agree?

As I said before, both theories: that of Asian origin and that of native Italian origina have existed since ancient times. The presence of the Lemnian language is highly striking, as it's clear that, like Italian Etruscans, Lemnian ones were there since always (as far as memory could recall). Lemnians used Greek alphabet and not Etruscan one, what means that probably they hadn't migrated from Italy, at least in literary times. The fact that Lemnos is right in front of where Troy once stood adds weight to the Trojan connection.

You are ommiting the close ties to Rhaetian (a central European tongue) and to the southern Italian tongue it also resembbles. So, certainly, it either implies a much more wide connection, or something we can't quite figure out right now. Also, the whole Lemnian thingy is kind of vague and quite puzzling. We have only one single finding of that language and that has actually not been translated anyway! By the phonetic transliteration of the text, it seems to bear some resemblance to the Etruscan language, but again one single finding can be interpreted in various other ways that presuming that a host of native people spoke that language. Lemnos though was hellenized in historical times (late 6th century BC by the Athenians) and the inscription comes from the mid 6th century (so it certainly cannot be linked to any "trojan migration" or whatever theory).

Look at Cretan hairdress and Etruscan early hairdress: they are identical. Look at the position of women in Etruscan and Cretan civilizations. Then look at hairdress and position of women in IE Roman and Greek cultures: it's "another planet". Something deep in culture has changed with the arrival of the new Patriarchal warriors.

The Minoan culture - one I know extremely very well, since it's my homelands ancient history - bears no resemblance to the Etruscan culture at all. Also, if you go as far as link the Anatolians to the Etruscans, you should notice that Anatolian cultures have very, very little in common with their contemporary Minoan and Aegean cultures and that they were a notably patriarchical society. Actually, the Etruscans were a patriarchical society as well. The whole non-Aryan mitriarchy is seriously flawed generally and I think it's mostly wishful thinking on behalf of some archeologists and ethnologists, than anything close to reality. The position of the woman in Minoan Crete is no different than any Doric society - from what we know, of course. The Ionian Greeks, yes, those had not much high esteem for their women. Not the Dorians though. What does that prove? That Dorians are in reality pre-Greeks? I'd say the Minoan culture bears more resemblance than anything to the two cultures it had strong ties with: Egyptian and Myceanean.

There is no actual proof of a mass migration from the North in the Greek world, period. No proof at all. Not even linguistic proof. The whole IE invasion theory is based on vague premises and flawed hypothesis and a linguistic link that can be explained in many other ways than the "invasion theories". The modern archeology speaks about cultural continuity in the Aegean basin and surrounding areas from the 6th millenia BC and on, right up to the classical times. Small-scale migration surely has occured, but nothing as massive or as devastating as the IE thing.



Edited by Alkiviades
Back to Top
arfunda View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 97
  Quote arfunda Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Oct-2005 at 05:58

I want to talk you about my hometown Bartn. Bartn is in the northwestern Black Sea Region of Anotolia. Its ancient name was Parthenius. Parthenius was a river in Paphlogonia. Parthenius is well known in Greek mithology but the ethimology of the word is toll to be in Luwian language.

Enets were living around the Parthenius river. During the Troyan War Enets went to Troya to help Troyans. This is told in Iliada Of Homeros. (Iliada was written in 9th century BC I think). Homeros tells the Paphlogonians. King of Paphlogonia, Pylaimines, and his son. Harpalion, are told to be from the land of Enets which was around the Parthenius River and in Sesamos (today Amasra, a town of Bartn).Menelaos kills Harpalion.

After the war Enets go to Italy by ship. They settle in Italy and they call their new place as Eneto. Then Eneto is pronounced as Veneto.

The historians of Veneto finds their origis in Paphlogonia, in Parthenius so the plan a cycle tour from Italy to Bartn and they come to Bartn in 2001. They call their project as "Return to the roots, Paphlogonia". Prof. Ugo Silvello is the historian who has studied on Enets.

So we can say that Venetians are the Enets who cme from Parthenius of ancient Anotolia.

I red Iliada of Homeros but I haven't read the "Epic of Aeneis". It was written by Vergilius. In this epic, it is told that Aineias, one of the Troyan kings and the son of Aphrodite, had gone to Italy from Troja and had set up Rome. So the people of Rome are thought to be the children of Aineias of Troja.

I think it will be helpful  to read the epic.

 

Back to Top
Alkiviades View Drop Down
Baron
Baron
Avatar

Joined: 01-Sep-2005
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 469
  Quote Alkiviades Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Oct-2005 at 06:15
Ah, right, the Veneti... didn't some Slavs claim they are coming straight from Paphlagonian bloodline? This becomes muddier as time goes by...
Back to Top
arfunda View Drop Down
Knight
Knight
Avatar

Joined: 29-Sep-2005
Location: Turkey
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 97
  Quote arfunda Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 12-Oct-2005 at 06:44

http://www.portorama.net/content/view/112/49/

The route of Enets who lived in Paflogonia 1200 BC and Migrated to Italy after Trojan War.

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.251 seconds.