Print Page | Close Window

turks and etruscans are TROİAN?

Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: General History
Forum Name: Archaeology & Anthropology
Forum Discription: Topics on archaeology and anthropology
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=6099
Printed Date: 05-Apr-2020 at 06:48
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com


Topic: turks and etruscans are TROİAN?
Posted By: finikis
Subject: turks and etruscans are TROİAN?
Date 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/EtruskGeneticsEn.htm - http://sophistikatedkids.com/turkic/34Etruscans/EtruskGeneti csEn.htm




Replies:
Posted By: Attila2
Date Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 09:30

think its too unaccurate



Posted By: Maju
Date 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 http://sophistikatedkids.com/turkic/34Etruscans/EtruskGeneticsEn.htm#rf8 - 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!


Posted By: finikis
Date 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?



Posted By: Alkiviades
Date 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.

 



Posted By: finikis
Date 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..



Posted By: Maju
Date 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!


Posted By: Maju
Date 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!


Posted By: finikis
Date 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.



Posted By: Maju
Date 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/ - http://etp.classics.umass.edu/

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



-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: finikis
Date Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 18:21

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

 



Posted By: turkos
Date Posted: 11-Oct-2005 at 18:43
this subject was talked too much last year in turkey.professor haluk şahin 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 çanakkale(troy)with his army and he sweared to take revenge of hector.in ww1 ataturk did the same thing.haluk şahin 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


Posted By: SearchAndDestroy
Date 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


Posted By: Alkiviades
Date 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 http://www.omniglot.com/writing/greek.htm - 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.



Posted By: Maju
Date 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!


Posted By: Maju
Date 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!


Posted By: Alkiviades
Date 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.



Posted By: arfunda
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2005 at 05:58

I want to talk you about my hometown Bartın. Bartın 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. (Ilişada 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 Bartın).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 Bartın and they come to Bartın 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.

 



Posted By: Alkiviades
Date 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...


Posted By: arfunda
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2005 at 06:44

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



Posted By: arfunda
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2005 at 07:00

The settlement of Italian Peninsula by Etruscans is in 900- 800 BC in this web:http://www.wsu.edu/~dee/ROME/ETRUSCAN.HTM

Trojan War is in 1184 BC. So  can we say that Enets and Trojans had gone to Italy earlier than Etrucans?



Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2005 at 07:24
Originally posted by Alkiviades

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,


That wasn't my intention: I mean to emphasize that Etruscan is easy to read because they used the precursor of our Latin alphabet. Just that.

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?[/quote]

Why not? Mycenenan, Hittite, Egyptian and Trojan cultures (Eastern Late Bronze Age cultures) were flourishing in the 14th century BCE. Contacts with the Aegean are atested in at least some Western Mediterranean  regionsfor earlier and later dates.

Anyhow you could also concede that a native culture could have been conquered later by Aegeans, though this is my second preference. Succesive migrations (one c. 1300, another c. 1000 maybe) could be accepted also.

The http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villanovan_culture - article at Wikipedia dates Vilanova culture later: at 1100 BCE for pre-Vilanova and only 900 for Vilanova proper. It also says it was the first Iron culture of all Italy, what should favor their oriental origin. If these dates are correct, then Etruscans could have arrived in the midst of the Sea Peoples' mess and even in coincidence with the destruction of Troy by the Greeks.

So far, the exact explanation can only be speculative but the notion of contact and genetic flow seems quite well attested by the study, so there must be something to it. I find more likely an Anatolia>Etruria flow than the opposite in any case.

Notice that while Minoans did have an script before Mycenean (Greek) invasion (Linear A), the same can't be said about Troyans or possibly other Anatolian or Egean peoples.

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.


I know nothing about that southern Italian tongue connection but Rhaetian is not any "Central-European" tongue, rather an Italo-Alpine one. It's thought that Rhaetians could well be a remnant of Etruscan or Etruscizied refugees that gathered in the safety of the mountains when Celts invaded the region. You know that Etruscans controlled and colonized for some time the Po valley, don't you?

Anyhow I can be wrong too.

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).

As far as I can recall, ancient Greeks were perfectly aware of the Etruscan-Lemnian connection. Some thought that Lemnians were Etruscans that had migrated eastward and others thought it was the other way around.

I can't find my book on the Etruscans right now but the Etrurian nature of the Lemnian language seems rather beyond doubt: A related language is the language once spoken on the island of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemnos" title="Lemnos" style="font-style: italic; - Lemnos , before the Athenian invasion ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/6th_century_BC" title="6th century BC" style="font-style: italic; - 6th century BC ), where a stone tablet written with a script related to Etruscan was found. We know that the inhabitants actually spoke this language due to the plethora of ceramic pieces with inscriptions written with the same alphabet, similar to the western (" http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Chalcidian&action=edit" class="new" title="Chalcidian" style="font-style: italic; - Chalcidian ") http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greek_alphabet" title="Greek alphabet" style="font-style: italic; - Greek alphabet . However, we do not know when or how speakers of this dialect arrived at this island. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemnos_stele" title="Lemnos stele" style="font-style: italic; - Lemnos stele . ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etruscan_language - Wikipedia again )

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.


If you look at the statues of ancient Etruscans and the murals of Crete, the people do look very alike, specially with their "rasta" hairdresses. The position of women, as I stated before also seems quite better than in Greek or Roman cultures.

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.

I'm not knowledgeable but you tell me.

Actually, the Etruscans were a patriarchical society as well.

Nothing compared with Romans. Romans considered them some kind of libertines because of the freedom women had in Etruscan society.


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.

You will never read from me the term Matriarchy: I don't think its has ever existed save in Patriarchal minds. Matrifocality has indeed existed though it would be too speculative to say it applied to Cretan society. But what is clear is that in diferent Patriarchal societies the status, role and freedom for women can be very diferent: just look at modern Scandinavia and modern Arabia. Both are Patriarchal but there's no comparison.

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.

I don't know about those diferences, except in militarist Sparta, where women could do sports and such but anyhow were chosen by men when it came to marriage. Nothing to do with Etruscan and probably Minoan societies.

Anyhow, please feel free to ilustrate me about the diferences and extension of the Dorian sociology. Had Thebes or Corinth the same customs as Sparta? I don't think it is the case but you surely know better.

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.



Curiously the same negation of IE invasion is found among some Indians and Iranians (and some time ago from Germanics too). It is self-obvious that IEs could have not sprung from the three countries at the same time and all points to these IEs being original from the Eurasian steppes. Where did they arrive to Greece, I can't tell but, as I know more about Neolithic and Chalcolitic than Bronze Age archaeology, I'd tend to think that in the Bronze age.

Anyhow, you tell me: when is it possible that these Greek-speakers arrived to Hellas? In the eve of Mycenean civilization maybe?

...

On a side-note, the Wiki-article on etruscan language also mentions some gold tablets with Etruscan script found in Bulgarian context. Could they be Thracian?


-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2005 at 07:35
While I would like the Enets (Eneas?) thing to be real, as part of my family comes from the Veneto and Padova region and their genealogies claim to descend from Trojan Hector . I fear it makes not much sense, as Veneti spoke a Italic language (sometimes associated with Illyrian too). They must be related to Latins and Samnites, not to Etruscans, and therefore probably not to Troy. Latin/Italic closer relative is known to be Germanic, what makes the Aegean connection very unlikely - unless you add Etruscan cultural dominance and potential Aegean link into the mix. 

-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: SearchAndDestroy
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2005 at 12:00

I found this article in Wikipedia, the last they said on their orgins with further research now think they were actually indigenous to Italy.

Another question I have, I heard the Romans were indegenous also and actually were a small village in Italy of nothing but farmers.

Sorry Maju I couldn't find anything about Augustus have blonde hair, but I know I read it and heard about it from a historian in  documentary. The reason I remember it is because they always depicted him with dark in hollywood, and now hearing he's blonde makes that kind of thing more noticable. In the show Rome on HBO they depicted Augustus, well in the show still Octavian as blonde which made like the show more because it shows they have done their research.



-------------
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 12-Oct-2005 at 12:42
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy

I found this article in Wikipedia, the last they said on their orgins with further research now think they were actually indigenous to Italy.


It's been the dominant theory lately but if new paleogentic studies contradict it at least partly, we should reconsider, don't you think?

Another question I have, I heard the Romans were indegenous also and actually were a small village in Italy of nothing but farmers.

Rome was originally a group of three villages of Latins and Sabines (they were gathered by Etruscans, who drained the forum). Latins, whose early capital was Alba Longa, were a tiny people among several other Italic tribes of IE language. It's been assumed that the these Italic peoples, including Latins, Samnites, Umbrians, Veneti and others, came from Central Europe in the Late Bronze Age (c. 1350 BCE, according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Italic_languages - Wikipedia ) replacing or rather dominating other pre-IE native peoples.

Sorry Maju I couldn't find anything about Augustus have blonde hair, but I know I read it and heard about it from a historian in  documentary. The reason I remember it is because they always depicted him with dark in hollywood, and now hearing he's blonde makes that kind of thing more noticable. In the show Rome on HBO they depicted Augustus, well in the show still Octavian as blonde which made like the show more because it shows they have done their research.

I actually don't know and I don't think it's important. You go to Rome now and you will surely find many blondes. The most clearly Mediterranean part of Italy is the south, while the North is quite Alpinic, with plenty of fair types. The center is somehow intermediate. It was surely that way in the Roman period. If Latins came originally from the North, it's likely that the elite were somehow fairer than the average Roman but this is just an speculation.



-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: Sharrukin
Date Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 01:53
One telling thing about Troy itself.  Recent investigation of artefacts recovered from past Troy excavations has revealed a bronze seal inscribed in Luwian.  If the Trojans were Luwians there is a consistency with other known circumstancial evidence.  The land of Troy whom Homer called Wilios is comparable with the name of a distant land to the west of the Hittites they knew as Wilusa.  One of the kings of Wilusa was known as Alaksandush which looks similar to the other name of the Trojan prince Paris, Alexandros.  The name Alaksandush has the element -sandush, which is the name of a Luwian deity.  The later Greeks knew this deity as either Sandon or Santas.  The name of the father of Paris, Priam, king of Troy, has a name comparable to a Luwian one, namely Pryamuwa.  Lastly, Wilusa was considered an "Arzawa land" by the Hittites.  Since we know that Arzawa itself was Luwian-speaking and that another name for it was Luwiya, Wilusa being an "Arzawa land" may have denoted an ethno-linguistic connection. 


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 13-Oct-2005 at 03:47
Originally posted by Sharrukin

One telling thing about Troy itself.  Recent investigation of artefacts recovered from past Troy excavations has revealed a bronze seal inscribed in Luwian.  If the Trojans were Luwians there is a consistency with other known circumstancial evidence.  The land of Troy whom Homer called Wilios is comparable with the name of a distant land to the west of the Hittites they knew as Wilusa.  One of the kings of Wilusa was known as Alaksandush which looks similar to the other name of the Trojan prince Paris, Alexandros.  The name Alaksandush has the element -sandush, which is the name of a Luwian deity.  The later Greeks knew this deity as either Sandon or Santas.  The name of the father of Paris, Priam, king of Troy, has a name comparable to a Luwian one, namely Pryamuwa.  Lastly, Wilusa was considered an "Arzawa land" by the Hittites.  Since we know that Arzawa itself was Luwian-speaking and that another name for it was Luwiya, Wilusa being an "Arzawa land" may have denoted an ethno-linguistic connection. 


That's very interesting. I did know about the Wilusa and Arzawa thing but not about the seal and the other linguistic connections. Luwian is Lydian, isn't it?

This possibly means that if the Etruscan-Anatolian (or rather Etruscan-Aegean probably) connection is real they must have come from another people. Lemnos still stand as a Etruscan-speaking community in that region. What about the Thracian connection? (just guessing)

It could also be the the case that Troyans were only Luwizied but with a diferent substratum.

Another obscure point is the Sea People's connection. We think that some of the Sea Peoples were Mycenean Greeks but others are unidentified. A name very simmilar to Rassena (Etruscan in their language) appears in some cases.


-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: Phallanx
Date Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 07:29
Hmmm, well actually there is no reference to a Sandon in any texts I've read, but most acknowledge the Hellinic Herakles to be that  diety..

Interesting that Priam, who's original name was Podargos (obviously connected to his "running for his life", or as others believe, since Podarges is a synonym to "leukopous" and white was connected to cowards, in contrast to dark discriptions.
For example, Herakles was  proverbially melampugos (having a black behind) as indicative of his bravery, as opposed to 'pugargos' (having a white behind), a coward . Irwin, E., 1974, Colour Terms in Greek Poetry, Hakkert, Toronto..

How it can be attested to be Luwian, when the myth surrounding his life mentions that he acutally bribed Herakles (priato= bribe)... anyway.. I'm open to other theories..

-------------
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.


Posted By: SearchAndDestroy
Date Posted: 14-Oct-2005 at 23:07

It seems kind of weird for people to try to claim a history of a people who are no longer around. I have a Italian backround, but does that make me Roman, a Samnite, or even a Etruscan? Even if one of my ancestors were from one of these groups, the genetics passed on is so small I really couldn't claim the history of the people. My blood is very mixed, even Native American, which I don't claim any of their history, it's nice to know I had a ancestor that was one of these great people.

By the logic shown here, that Turks are Trojans because they occupy the land, wouldn't that also make all Americans, Native Americans?

And wasn't Troy just a city, so do we actually know the genetics of the Trojans? So many groups of people moved through that area that their lineage could be just wiped out.



-------------
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey


Posted By: Artaxiad
Date Posted: 15-Oct-2005 at 00:00
Weren't the Trojans ethnic Hittites?


Posted By: Sharrukin
Date Posted: 15-Oct-2005 at 00:59

That's very interesting. I did know about the Wilusa and Arzawa thing but not about the seal and the other linguistic connections. Luwian is Lydian, isn't it?

No.  Lydian is closer to Hittite (perhaps Hittite-derived) then to Luwian.  For instance, the Hittite prince Madduwattash bears a name similar to that of Lydian kings such as Sadyattes and Alyattes.  The Lydian Heraclid king (Hellenized form) Myrsilus bears a name like that of the Hittite king Murshilish.  The irony is that classical Lydia seems to have been where Hittite-era Arzawa was, considering the equivalence of Arzawan Apasas with classical Ephesus. 

Another obscure point is the Sea People's connection. We think that some of the Sea Peoples were Mycenean Greeks but others are unidentified. A name very simmilar to Rassena (Etruscan in their language) appears in some cases.

Of those peoples identified as "Sea Peoples" two names stand out as probably being Greek peoples, the Akawasha and the Daniuna.  What the Egyptians called the Akawasha is probably the same as what the Hittites called the Ahhiyawa.  In Hittite records they were at times a thorn in their side in western Anatolia as well as on friendly and intimate terms.  They have been identified with the Akhaiwoi as Homer would call the Greeks in their war with Troy.  One of the Ahhiyawan kings, by the name of Attarshiyash bears a name resembling that of king Atreus of Mycenae, and a "brother" of the king of Ahhiyawa by the name of Tawagalawas bears a name similar to that of a name in Mycenaean Greek known as Etewoklewes, the classical name, Eteocles.  It is generally agreed on now that this name is probably that of the Mycenaean Greeks.  The other name, Daniuna, resembles that of the name Danaioi, a name of the Argives, as well as another name of the Greeks in the Illiad.  The Egyptians were aware of the Greeks at least since the 16th century BC having referred to their land as either Haunebu or Danaya.  These two names probably referred to the same people in that in an earlier "Sea People" incursion, in the time of the Egyptian king Merneptah (c. 1232 BC), the list of the confederates mentioned the Akawasha but not the Daniuna, but in the later invasion in the time of king Rameses III (c. 1191 BC), the Daniuna are mentioned but not the Akawasha

Other "Sea Peoples" seem to denote either Anatolian peoples like the Lukka, "Lycians" and the Tursha (Hittite, Taruisha), "Trojans" or Aegean peoples such as the Shekelesh "Sicilians", and the Sherden, "Sardinians" at a time when they still had not as yet migrated to the islands named after them. 

Hmmm, well actually there is no reference to a Sandon in any texts I've read, but most acknowledge the Hellinic Herakles to be that  diety..

Yes, as a matter of fact, the Heraclid Dynasty of Lydia is sometimes called the Sandonid Dynasty.

How it can be attested to be Luwian, when the myth surrounding his life mentions that he acutally bribed Herakles (priato= bribe)... anyway.. I'm open to other theories..

Heracles also served the Queen of Lydia.  Since we know that Lydian was not Greek, more than one answer can suffice.  There were either official interpreters to make Heracles and each of his listeners understand each other, or Heracles knew how to speak Luwian, or both Priam and Omphale knew how to speak Greek.  The Hittites were known to have intimate ties with the royalty of the Achaeans.  There is even a mention of members of the Hittite royal family riding chariots with the nobility of the Achaeans.  How did they understand each other?  Luwian was probably the lingua franca of western Anatolia, and we know that the Hittites kept Luwian texts.  Since the Hittites regarded the Achaeans as equal to themselves in terms of political power, but possessed most of Anatolia, any of the above situations may have occurred. 



Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 15-Oct-2005 at 04:22
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy

It seems kind of weird for people to try to claim a history of a people who are no longer around. I have a Italian backround, but does that make me Roman, a Samnite, or even a Etruscan? Even if one of my ancestors were from one of these groups, the genetics passed on is so small I really couldn't claim the history of the people. My blood is very mixed, even Native American, which I don't claim any of their history, it's nice to know I had a ancestor that was one of these great people.

By the logic shown here, that Turks are Trojans because they occupy the land, wouldn't that also make all Americans, Native Americans?

And wasn't Troy just a city, so do we actually know the genetics of the Trojans? So many groups of people moved through that area that their lineage could be just wiped out.



I don't think that the paper or even the starter of the topic meant to claim Trojan inheritance for Turks or whoever. The title is very wrongly chosen though.

Yet, unlike with Native Americans, it is most likely that Trojan or Trojan-related lineages have never been supressed and replaced by any other people. What applies to the extreme replacement of populations in North America and Australia, does not apply for the rest of history and geography. While people's or rather armies were continuously passing by Anatolia, modern inhabitants are surely about 90% decendans of the peoples who dwelt there in Antiquity. We have no reason to believe that any in-depth ethnic cleansing or genocide was ever done before the 20th century. Only Greek migration to coastal Anatolia may have locally changed significatively the population of some specific locations but, being Greeks and Anatolians so close genetically it's dificult to determine.


-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: SearchAndDestroy
Date Posted: 15-Oct-2005 at 13:44

We are talking over three thousand years. If your talking about the Trojan citizens of Troy, and if the legend of the city is true that they were pretty much wiped out from the Greeks, then I doubt there genetic lineage would have lived on, especially if they mixed. It's like with a cousin, you share 50% of your genetic code with them, by 2nd cousin about 25%, but 4th cousin your basicly not even family anymore. After Troy fell if there were survivors my guess is they'd be a hand full and any group coming in would basicly just wash there identity away because it's no more a isolated population so to speak.

But you can find the the group of people that made up the Trojans. If they were Hitittes, wouldn't the Armenians have a better chance of being the decendents, as Hititites are the ancestors of the Armenians right? This is just a question here, nothing I can really claim as being true or even possible.

 

 



-------------
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 15-Oct-2005 at 16:00
It's understood that, first, Troy wasn't just the city but also the surrounding region (Troade) and that they had many allies (some of which would probably be ethnically akin), and, second, that they could have migrated prior to the destruction of the city. Regarding the first point there's a whole legend of Aeneas, who supposedly survived (outside the city) and founded Rome. Arfunda also noted that there are other legends regarding other Anatolian peoples migrating to Italy.

Anyhow, if you read the article, it doesn't talk of Troyans as such but Anatolians. They could be Luwians or Hittites or Lycians or Mysians or Carians...

... actually the Anatolian "parentage" is just a reference, they could well be from other nearby regions with simmilar genetics, like Greece.

The scope for the actual meaning of the study is wide enough for us to speculate in the hope that further archaeological findings or comprehensive studies give a better light to the issue.

By the moment we have that:
  1. Etruscan aristocrats had a much greater level of Anatolian MtDNA (maternal lineage) than modern Italians, including modern Tuscans.
  2. There is an island near ancient Troy (Lemnos) that was speaking and writing an Etruscan dialect.
  3. There are two traditions of legendary Anatolian heroes that reached Italy and founded nations there (Aeneas -> Latins, Enets -> Veneti). These two western IE nations, probably original from what's now Germany, were strongly influenced by Etruscans.
  4. Etruscan is not IE.
  5. Ancient references also talk of Etruscans possibly being Anatolian (Lydian) in origin.
  6. In the obscure period of the foundation of the proto-Etruscan culture of Vilanova and the destruction of Troy, there was a not less obscure phenomenon known as the Sea Peoples that seem to have been the Vikings of the Ancient Mediterranean and whose names can be identified partly with Greeks but partly resemble rather Italian pre-IE peoples, including the Rasnal (Etruscans).
Get your own conclussions. Not easy to decide, I must say.

Btw, I'm not sure that Armenians have much relation with Hittites. They are rather said to have been Phrygian colonists. Lydians were Hittite speakers.


-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: SearchAndDestroy
Date Posted: 15-Oct-2005 at 17:25

The Legend of Aeneas is just that, a legend. Augustus had it written to give the Romans a better identity and by the book I have was written for the new era of the empire to create a national hero for "the race destined to hold the world beneath its rule".

So back then they were going on much of anything except political propaganda when Augustus had ended a civil war, turned around a bankrupt empire, and had a period of peace.

The whole legend seems far fetched, when the Trojans landed and founded Rome they had also stole the women of a neighboring people. In all actualality the Romans were probably just a small village of native people that grew from farmers to the citizens of a empire.



-------------
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 15-Oct-2005 at 18:10
Even if you're right in that, you still have 51/2 points left to think about.

Now, on the legend of Aeneas, we have the first part, which is from the Iliad, that clearly states that Aeneas and his family escaped helped by Poseidon, as Aeneas was predestined to become king of the Trojan people.

Then, the second part, which is the association of Aeneas to Italy (and specifically to Rome) doesn't seem to be just an invention of Virgil (not of Augustus in any case) but actually was dwindling in the imaginary of the incipient Greco-Roman civilization from before. At least Apollodorus seems to refer to that connection, and so does Ovid. Anyhow, Virgil himself was a non-Roman Italian born near the Etruscan city of Mantua. Maybe from that he gets his fascination for Aeneas and his connection to Italy.

It could well be an old Etruscan asociation that was transfered to Rome. At least there's more room to speculate than just attributing the major literary work of the Aeneid to a political decision from Augustus. Augustus pushed for the work to be published even if unfinished, with all its literary defects like the vulgar pluralization with -s, etc., but he didn't decide to write it and much less  added a single word to it. It was Virgil's work, his unfinished work of 10 years.


-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: SearchAndDestroy
Date Posted: 15-Oct-2005 at 20:46

Thats what my book of Mythology says, it was written by Virgil, but was ment to give the Romans a hero.

heres what the book says-

Originally posted by Edith Hamilton, Mythology Timeless Tales of Gods And Heroes. pg 230, introduction

]

The Aeneid, the greatest of Latin poems, is chief authority for this story. It was written when Augustus had taken over the bankrupt Roman world after the chaos that followed Caesar's assassination. His strong hand ended the furious civil wars and brought about Pax Augusta, which lasted nearly half a century. Virgil and all his generation were fired with enthusiasm for the new order, and the Aeneid was written to exalt the Empire, to provide a great national hero and a founder for "the race destined to hold the world beneath its rule" Virgil's patriotic purpose is probably responsible for the change from human Aeneas of the first books to theunhuman prodigy of the last. The poet was finally caried away into the purely fantasticby his determination to create a hero for Rome that would make all other heroes seem insignifcant. A tendency to exaggeration was Roman trait. The latin names of the gods are, of course, used; and the Latin forms in the case of any personage who has a Latin as well as a Greek name. Ulysses, for instance, is Latin for Odysseus.

Honestly I don't think this story can be held accountable as historical. It was just a tale to amuse the populace and give a sense of pride.If the Trojans did manage to come over, I doubt it had anything to do with them knowing about it and just took the character from the Greek poem and added more on him.



-------------
"A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government." E.Abbey


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 16-Oct-2005 at 06:34
I'm sure that Virgil's Aeneid was created largely out of his imagination, yet the ultimate source for the legend is older (Apollodorus lived one century before him and Ovid's references are also often considered to have older lost backgrounds). Virgil also recycled some Greco-Italian mythological items to build up his stuff.

And, as I said before, you still have other 5 points to consider. I would never build a theory only on mythological materials.


-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: ArmenianSurvival
Date Posted: 16-Oct-2005 at 06:35
I havent read most of the posts on this thread, but even if Trojans migrated to Italy, what does that have to do with Turks?

There is also a theory that the Trojans migrated East after the Trojan war, setting up shop in the Caucasus and giving steam to what would become the Armenian culture. Its only a theory, though, but i have heard it from some historians. I dont buy into that stuff, myself.


-------------
Mass Murderers Agree: Gun Control Works!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Van_Resistance

Քիչ ենք բայց Հայ ենք։


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 16-Oct-2005 at 11:26
Originally posted by ArmenianSurvival

I havent read most of the posts on this thread, but even if Trojans migrated to Italy, what does that have to do with Turks?



Nothing actually: read the posts.


-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: Sharrukin
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2005 at 06:58

It is not inconceivable that peoples of the Levant could colonize the western Mediterranean.  The Phoenicians and the Greeks are the most verified case and point.  If there was a kernel of truth to Lydians colonizing Etruria it may be probably more truthful to simply say that the Lydian element was assimilated by the Etruscans whose culture was native.  Not only was Lemnian related to Etruscan but perhaps also Rhaetian.  There may have been, instead a substratum of pre-IE languages of which those three languages were the remnants.  Herodotus speaks of Lemnians as Pelasgians and their language related to other peoples further north in the Balkans (Book 1.57) calling them "neighbors to the Tyrrhenians".  It is curious that these particular Balkan Pelasgians were called "of Tyrrhenian race" (Thucydides 4.109).  Therefore instead of looking for an "Etruscan" migration perhaps it is much better to think of natives of Italy a remnant of a much larger group of linguistically related peoples of southern Europe which gained an Anatolian element. 

The problem with the Aeneas story of having sailed to Italy is that the earliest attestations (In Homer and Hesiod) mention no such tradition.  Instead, the Homeric tradition makes Aeneas the new king of the Trojans as well as his descendants after the Sack of Troy (Illiad 20.307) (Homeric Hymns - To Aphrodite 191-198).  Later, according to the Little Illiad, Aeneas was taken as a prize by Neoptolemus to Pharsalia (frag. 14).  In The Sack of Troy, Aeneas simply withdraws from Troy to Mt. Ida before the Greeks took the city.  Thus it is several hundred years before there is a tie-in with Romans.  The Greeks know of a much older tradition independent of the "Aeneas tradition" regarding the Romans.  Accordingly, the earliest tradition as known by Stesichorus (c. 600 BC) makes the founder the Rome itself a female named "Roma" who fled from Troy.  Since Stesichorus was contemporary with the later Homeric tradition, the tie-in of Aeneas with Rome was of much later date, but the Trojan connection itself is quite early.



Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2005 at 08:37
I'm personally inclined to believe that colonizers are more likely to assimilate colonized ones than vice versa and I tend to think that the Aegean->Italy migration did happen at some time probably in the turbulent period that comprises the Sea Peoples' campaigns and the destruction of Troy at the end of the 2nd milennium BCE.

Yet your mentions of a Balcanic connection made me recall something that was posted some time ago in a now locked post by suspended member Albanian Trilogy (copy-and-paste, copy-and-paste ). He posted some curious transcriptions of Etruscan terms and surprising coincidences in Albanian (see http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4769&PN=3 - http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4769& ;PN=3 and scroll down till you find some pics or scanned material on that). This has been the only locked topic I have protested about because while AT was an autist I did want to discuss more on some of the Albanian origins theories and particularly in the possible Etrsuco-Albano-Pelasgian connection.

Maybe this is the occasion to rescue those curious almost literal Etrusco-Albanian translations and ask Vulkan (I think he's the only Albanian member) if the translation is valid or is a far-fetched speculation.

The material is the following:









Any ideas?


-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: Phallanx
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2005 at 09:25
Yeah I remember that one 

I just loved reading how in the next word  table 'he' tried to connect 'Thetis' to 'Thalassa' without knowing the basics.
http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=4769&PN=3 - LINK

Had the author of this article/table ever read the Oxyrhynchus papyrus he would know what the name is all about. Alkman tells us that :

""For when matter began to be established, a certain passage (poros), like a beginning (arche), was created. Alkman says that the material of everything was confused and not made.
Then, he says, there came into being he (or that, masculine) who arranged everything; then a passage came into being, and when the passage had gone past, a sign (tekmor) followed. And the passage is like an origin, and the sign is like an end.
When Thetis came into being, these became the beginning and end of everything, and all things have a similar nature to that of bronze, and Thetis to that of the craftsman, and the way and the sign to the beginning and the end... on account of sun and moon not yet having come into being but matter (hyle) still being without distinction. There came about therefore ... passage and sign and darkness. Day and moon and thirdly darkness; the flashings; not merely day but with sun; first there was only darkness, after this when it was separated "

So we find that
1) At the beginning matter was confused, there neither a Sun nor a Moon. So the Sidereal Cosmos as we know it was literally undeveloped.
2)Untill someone was born (Thetis) that put everything in place like a craftsman would.

Thetis = from tithemi (e=hetta) which means "to set, put, place" = thetis = 'he one who places'
---

I could continue with words like 'elkw', 'thera' (with an hetta), 'krounos', ....etc still in use today or others that are obviously of ancient origin....

The way I see it, it's just another propaganda attempt to introduce a noble historic background... similar to some other self proclaimed scholars that have presented a Batic origin for Homer's Troy, despite the finds that undoubtably point to the exact location...

This, as a number of other attempts, be it that of Polat Kaya insisting on a Turkish origin, Georgiev and his theory , Mellart proposing an Anatolian origin, Z, Mayani (an Albanian Jew in origin citizen of France) presenting the Albanian connection (these might very well be, his tables), Gordeziani (a Georgian ) presenting an origin from Kolchis.....etc are by no means acceptable theories, which is obviously the reason that they are not accepted by the international oranizations...

I guess we'll just have to wait and see...


-------------
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2005 at 11:19
Nah, man! I didn't understand a word of your explanation actually but, if we're going to speculate on thalassos, I'd say it's a clear Basque word (itsaso), a word that is also origin for English sea. You know that English like to shorten words.

But, seriously, I'd like to find out more on the Albanian connection. Much of what Albanian Trilogy posted was pretty awful but this one got me curious to find out more. The origin of Albanians themselves is misterious enough to intrigue me.


-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: Sharrukin
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2005 at 11:19

I'm personally inclined to believe that colonizers are more likely to assimilate colonized ones than vice versa and I tend to think that the Aegean->Italy migration did happen at some time probably in the turbulent period that comprises the Sea Peoples' campaigns and the destruction of Troy at the end of the 2nd milennium BCE.

Like I said, colonization from the Levant to the western Mediterranean was something that is verfiable.  As for colonizers vs. natives, it really depends.  The Hyksos colonized Egypt, yet they did not "Hyksosized" the Egyptians.   Indo-Aryan groups became rulers of the Hurrians, yet they did not Aryanize the Hurrians.  The Turkic Bulgars ruled the Thracian Slavs but they were Slavicised. 



Posted By: Perseas
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2005 at 12:50
Originally posted by Sharrukin

The problem with the Aeneas story of having sailed to Italy is that the earliest attestations (In Homer and Hesiod) mention no such tradition.  Instead, the Homeric tradition makes Aeneas the new king of the Trojans as well as his descendants after the Sack of Troy (Illiad 20.307) (Homeric Hymns - To Aphrodite 191-198).  Later, according to the Little Illiad, Aeneas was taken as a prize by Neoptolemus to Pharsalia (frag. 14).  In The Sack of Troy, Aeneas simply withdraws from Troy to Mt. Ida before the Greeks took the city.  Thus it is several hundred years before there is a tie-in with Romans.  The Greeks know of a much older tradition independent of the "Aeneas tradition" regarding the Romans.  Accordingly, the earliest tradition as known by Stesichorus (c. 600 BC) makes the founder the Rome itself a female named "Roma" who fled from Troy.  Since Stesichorus was contemporary with the later Homeric tradition, the tie-in of Aeneas with Rome was of much later date, but the Trojan connection itself is quite early.

To add some infos, according to Little Iliad, Aeneas was taken as plunder together with Andromache from Neoptolemus at the return from Troy. Later he was released after the death of Neoptolemus but according to other interpretation Aeneas was released during the time of Troy's looting. According to a surmise of Hellanikos, Aeneas got away from Troy and he came by sea to Pallini of Halkidiki and then, through the country of Molossians he went to Italy where he built Rome. As a matter of fact, it was found in Halkidiki an ancient coin of 6th Century BC, portraying Aeneas.



-------------
A mathematician is a person who thinks that if there are supposed to be three people in a room, but five come out, then two more must enter the room in order for it to be empty.


Posted By: Phallanx
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2005 at 12:55
Well it's not actually so much my explanation but what Alkman a pre-Socratic poet (6th cent BC) has written.
An Oxyrhynchus papyrus (number 2390) contains a quotation that mentions the above text. He stated that Thetis (she/he who sets/puts in place), was the one that put matter in order so the world was able to develop.

This is totally unrelated to 'Thalassa' which derives from 'thalw' = to abound and 'alas' = salt.

Herodotus speaks of Lemnians as Pelasgians and their language related to other peoples further north in the Balkans (Book 1.57) calling them "neighbors to the Tyrrhenians".

Well yes but he also mentions in the exact same text, that the Peasgians were originally neighbors of those now called Dorians and settled in Thessaly. Which rather points to an 'out of Hellas' migration that to that of 'out of the Levant'..


-------------
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2005 at 14:51
Originally posted by Sharrukin

I'm personally inclined to believe that colonizers are more likely to assimilate colonized ones than vice versa and I tend to think that the Aegean->Italy migration did happen at some time probably in the turbulent period that comprises the Sea Peoples' campaigns and the destruction of Troy at the end of the 2nd milennium BCE.

Like I said, colonization from the Levant to the western Mediterranean was something that is verfiable.  As for colonizers vs. natives, it really depends.  The Hyksos colonized Egypt, yet they did not "Hyksosized" the Egyptians.   Indo-Aryan groups became rulers of the Hurrians, yet they did not Aryanize the Hurrians.  The Turkic Bulgars ruled the Thracian Slavs but they were Slavicised. 



I wouldn't say that Hiksos colonized Egypt, they rather conquered it. It's not the colonizing case of more advanced peoples on less advanced ones but rather the opposite case of less developed tribes invading a more advanced one, something that not always ends with the cultural assimilation of the invaded (examples: steppary invaders of China, Germanic invaders of Rome).

But anyhow, you're right that it can be the other way... can't decide. You see: if Etruscans were native of Italy as to share with Iberians and Ligurians the Cardium Pottery Mediterranean Neolithic background, their language should be expected to be similar. Yet they don't sound the same at all (phonetically Iberian is close to Basque, sounds simmilar and uses the same type of consonants - Etruscan does not: you won't find Ps and Fs in Iberian, but you find Bs and Gs, which Etruscan doesn't have).

Yet, it's known that during the Chalcolithic (pan-European chronology), Aegean/Balcanic influence does show a clear mark in southern and central Italy (Tuscany included). This could have been such an early colonization as to be considered "native" for the times we are considering. But still would imply a connection with either the Aegean or the Balcans (Rakhmani-Bubanji-Hum complex specially).



-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 17-Oct-2005 at 14:55
Originally posted by Phallanx



Herodotus speaks of Lemnians as Pelasgians and their language related to other peoples further north in the Balkans (Book 1.57) calling them "neighbors to the Tyrrhenians".

Well yes but he also mentions in the exact same text, that the Peasgians were originally neighbors of those now called Dorians and settled in Thessaly. Which rather points to an 'out of Hellas' migration that to that of 'out of the Levant'..


Could this mean that at some time Hellas was pluriethnic and ot just Greek?


-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: Sharrukin
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 02:00

Well yes but he also mentions in the exact same text, that the Peasgians were originally neighbors of those now called Dorians and settled in Thessaly. Which rather points to an 'out of Hellas' migration that to that of 'out of the Levant'..

The point is that regardless of where the Pelasgians originated, Greece as part of the Levant, was still in the Levant.  Besides, Homer mentions Pelasgians as inhabitants of Greece (Book 2.680) as well as inhabitants of western Anatolia (Book 2.840-844) these last being Trojan allies. 

I wouldn't say that Hiksos colonized Egypt, they rather conquered it. It's not the colonizing case of more advanced peoples on less advanced ones but rather the opposite case of less developed tribes invading a more advanced one, something that not always ends with the cultural assimilation of the invaded (examples: steppary invaders of China, Germanic invaders of Rome).

The Hyksos were colonizing the Egyptian Delta for at least a century or two before the actual "conquest". 

But anyhow, you're right that it can be the other way... can't decide. You see: if Etruscans were native of Italy as to share with Iberians and Ligurians the Cardium Pottery Mediterranean Neolithic background, their language should be expected to be similar. Yet they don't sound the same at all (phonetically Iberian is close to Basque, sounds simmilar and uses the same type of consonants - Etruscan does not: you won't find Ps and Fs in Iberian, but you find Bs and Gs, which Etruscan doesn't have).

You are assuming that cultural uniformity means linguistic uniformity as well.  This may be more true for an intrusive IE cultural complex, but not necessarily so for native cultures.  If we were to postulate an average original linguistic region in square miles (or square kms) we can fit from 20 to 40 different languages including PIE into the area of Europe given that studies have yielded a range of any given historical language as between 25,000 to 1 million square miles.  Now, assuming that, like PIE, linguistic differentiation occurred with the other languages, we can assume many language families within Europe including Iberian, Tartessian, Euskarian, and Etruscan as among the better known historically attested non-IE languages.  Even today, the only other non-IE language family which survives in Europe, Finno-Ugrian may be brought into this picture.  The point is that regardless if whether Etruscans share cultural traits with the Ligurians and Iberians at such a remote period, this still does not assume that they were related linguistically.  Statistically, each may represent a different non-IE language family altogether.

Now, regarding the Etruscans, they can be discernable by about 900 BC with emergence of the Villanova Culture (c. 900-700 BC).  The problem is that even before that, the Proto-Villanova Culture (c. 1100-900 BC) which is characterized by a uniformity of culture covering almost the entire extent of continental Italy, was in areas where known IE languages were spoken.  In terms of culture therefore, either the Etruscans owned the whole length of Italy, or they adopted IE culture.  The Proto-Villanova Culture is supposedly derived from the central European urnfield tradition, which is identified with IE culture.  It thus becomes quite certain that the native Etruscans adopted an Italian version of IE culture.  Since there is no evidence at this period of "oriental" elements entering Italy, assimilation of "Lydians" is the simplest theory to consider.  In fact, when we first discern "oriental" styles in Etruscan artefacts (indeed, also in the rest of Italy) they occured only by about 750 BC.

Could this mean that at some time Hellas was pluriethnic and ot just Greek?

The linguistic evidence points to more than one ethno-linguistic entity in Greece.  Studies of the Greek language itself have shown that there is a substratum of words without Greek etymology.  The interesting thing about this is that these non-Greek words fall into discernable categories.   Greek words for Mediterranean plants such as the fig, olive, hyacinth, cypress, laurel, marjoram, chickpea, chestnut, cherry and parsnip were not originally Greek.  The names of animals such as ass, the wild ox and the beetle are likewise originally non-Greek.  Other words included such for metal, tin, bronze, lead, jar, pail, oil flask, sword, javelin, cornice, coping, chamber, bath tub and brick.  Words for social/political concepts including basileos "king", doulos "slave", and "concubine" weren't originally Greek.  Now add to this, the names of heros and divinities such as Achilles, Theseus, Athene, Aphrodite, and Hermes.  We can even add to this list place-names such as Corinth, Knossos, Salamis, Larisa, Samos, and even Olympus and Mycenae.  In the final analysis, the "vocabulary suggests that these borrowings were not wholly random, but rather tend to focus on words that a population intrusive into a new land might be expected to adopt from the previous inhabitants." (In Search of the Indo-Europeans, by J.P. Mallory, page 68).



Posted By: Phallanx
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 05:52
The linguistic evidence points to more than one ethno-linguistic entity in Greece.  Studies of the Greek language itself have shown that there is a substratum of words without Greek etymology.  The interesting thing about this is that these non-Greek words fall into discernable categories.   Greek words for Mediterranean plants such as the fig, olive, hyacinth, cypress, laurel, marjoram, chickpea, chestnut, cherry and parsnip were not originally Greek.  The names of animals such as ass, the wild ox and the beetle are likewise originally non-Greek.  Other words included such for metal, tin, bronze, lead, jar, pail, oil flask, sword, javelin, cornice, coping, chamber, bath tub and brick.  Words for social/political concepts including basileos "king", doulos "slave", and "concubine" weren't originally Greek.  Now add to this, the names of heros and divinities such as Achilles, Theseus, Athene, Aphrodite, and Hermes.  We can even add to this list place-names such as Corinth, Knossos, Salamis, Larisa, Samos, and even Olympus and Mycenae.  In the final analysis, the "vocabulary suggests that these borrowings were not wholly random, but rather tend to focus on words that a population intrusive into a new land might be expected to adopt from the previous inhabitants." (In Search of the Indo-Europeans, by J.P. Mallory, page 68).


I for one would like to see how exactly can some foreign loan words constitute proof, enough proof to consider anthropologic research as false (presented before see Angel). Since when is 'bous' = ox non Hellinic and what does Mallory present?
Is it the rediculous origin from the Sanskrit 'ganh' that is explained by insisting on a single unknown original word of many convenient forms that gave us all the later...???

What is exactly the origin of 'plinthos'= brick  if not Hellinic and exactly what does it tell us about the words that form it, 'plassw'+ 'lithos' ?
Would this mean the Hellinic language not only adopted the word but also the words that form it ???

How does this theory propose to convince us that not only did they adopt a foreign word/ name (Aphrodite) that has a clear connection to the myth of emerging from the sea, but even managed to break it down into 'aphro' and 'duth' and use those two words individually as also seen above?

Of course the lands of Hellas weren't only inhabbited by Hellines and of course the Hellinic language has it's share of loans, ancient texts do tell us this quite clearly..
But it is more than obvious that in their delirium of trying to make finds of doubtable historic accuracy, these 'scholars' jump to many conclussions that aren't based on serious research..
Which in this case is presenting every non-IE word as a pre-IE adoption and thus rejecting the very existance of a language before the invisible IE invasions, which is literally unacceptale and unprovable..



-------------
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 06:52
I will follow with outmost interest this linguistic discussion. But in any case, IEs should have come from outside (or be original to Greece, what is extremely unlikely), wether or not there are conclussive proofs of that invasion/migration. 

-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: Alkiviades
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 07:06

Take whatever Mallory says with a pint of salt. I've never read anything more partial than his "in search for the IE" in the field of classical linguistics. Phallanx has pointed out only a very small number of striking inconcistencies with his writings. To write them all down, you'd need to present here 3/4 of the book (quite a task, even if there was no copyright issue at hand as well)

If Mallory sums up the whole IE construct, then this construct even linguistically (since ethnologically its already dead meat, so to say) is shaky... very shaky.

The more I am reading, the more I dismiss the whole IE construct, both linguistically and ethnologically... and I really need an alternative. This IE hypothesis has proven time after time after time that it holds no water at all, the holes are not just visible, but it's consisted solely by holes with nothing to hold them together.



Posted By: Phallanx
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 07:20
I'm not trying to turn this into another IE discussion, since my thesis has been noted many times before and I don't see it getting anywhere worth wild (meaning us agreeing on something) since it never has before.
I'm just stating that in their attempt to construct a past that suits them, (be it for propaganda reasons or other) many so called 'scholars' are jumping to unprovable conclussions..



-------------
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.


Posted By: sedamoun
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 07:37

Hello,

I read an article about the origins of the etruscan kings of Rome and their genetic similarities with (some) people from Anatolia, but i'm curious of something Caliph wrote:  "... you realize that modern Italians are not Turk (just about 10%) but actually Basque".

I do not think the Italians are the Basque's decendants but that they share the common genetics (along with the French, the Iberians...). If you have an article that proves me wrong, I would love to read it.

I Found an interesting article on http://www.raceandhistory.com - www.raceandhistory.com about the basques and their east-african origins.

  http://www.raceandhistory.com/worldhotspots/basque.htm - http://www.raceandhistory.com/worldhotspots/basque.htm



Posted By: vulkan02
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 10:52
Maju I got your private messenger and of course Ill be glad to give my opinion on it. A lot of the Albanian words posted in the comparison table are indeed very close to the etruscan ones and of course they have the specified meaning in Albanian. There's many scholars in Albania who have found artifacts that link ancient Illyrian-Pelasgian language (currently constitutes 30-40% of Albanian) to Etruscan language. Many of the Greek members here will jump and negate this right away but I don't see why it couldn't be possible for Illyrians and Etruscans to have similarities in their languages just like they had many similarities with the Thracians and Dacians. Geographically they were close too so it makes sense that there is some type of connection between the 2.
 I don't have the time to translate the whole scripture now... if someone could I would be glad and later try to write its meaning in Albanian .
Some of the Greek gods also are suggested to mean something in Albanian.
Kronos - Kron - Burim (source of all Gods??)
Zeus - Zot (God )
Aphrodite - Afer dita (afer - near   dita-light)
Athena - E thena( The spoken word.... speech)
Demeter(mother earth goddess) - Da mater(the mother)


I haven't really looked up all the Gods and their meaning in Albanian but it could have been a possibility that their names were adopted or introduced during the Dorian invasion.




-------------
The beginning of a revolution is in reality the end of a belief - Le Bon
Destroy first and construction will look after itself - Mao


Posted By: Phallanx
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 11:19
Honestly vulcan, how would you expect me to sit around and read this stuff without jumping ???


While I do believe you have the best of intentions, the problem is that your sources are totally bias.

Not only do we read claims of a 'relation' to Pelasgians and Etruscans, but now we top it off by claims on Gods that is supported by some rediculous manipulation of linguistics...

ZEUS
To understand where the name derives we must look into the very myth and connect him to his father and mother. So we have:

In the myth of Cronos eating his children. We have the symbolization of time ("Hronos" in Hellinic) eating his "children", days, months and years, without the earth ("Gaia") and the sky ("Ouranos") noticing it.
Probably having to do with the (false?) anticipated time linearity in our 3d-dimensional timespace. Or, if this is too much, it could have to do with the eradication of the memories of the early Hellinic civilization (dates back to 38,000 B.C.) after the glaciers melted at about 9,500 b.C. and the Aegan Sea flooded.
Zeus (from the verb "Zeugnyo"=create a link), comes as a link between the past and the known to us ancient Hellinic civilization putting a link between time and between people, under the same historical memories na the same "religion".

ATHENA:
Whoever knows the myth surrounding her, (which the author of this article obviously has no knowledge of) knows that she was born from the head of Zeus.Depending on the version of the myth, we find that she was raised by men either Triton, Pallas or Alalcomeneussince since her mother had been swallowed by Zeus.

So Athena, A-Thena when broken down gives us:
the privative 'a' and
thena = from thenion (written with hetta and omega) meaning milk.

So her name actually means without mothers milk, either in an active or in passive sense not giving suck, or unsuckled, in her charter as the virgin goddess, or as springing from the head of Zeus.

Aphrodite
Again the same problem as above appears. They allegedly  adopt a Gods name, construct a myth and conveniently the name has it's own meaning directly connected to the myth..

The same source also argues that :

Thetis, the goddess of waters and seas, would seem to be but Albanian "Det" which means "sea."

"Ulysses," either in its Latin or Hellinic form "Odysseus," means "traveler" in Albanian, from the word "udhe," meaning "route" and "travel"

Sorry bout the laughing but I just can't help myself...

Thetis explained above, and
ODYSSEUS
From the verb Odyssao/Odyssomai = to be wroth against, hate. from the root od- also seen in the Latin Odium= hatred. refering to the hatred of the Gods that made him wander. It's simple once you understand that Odysseus wasn't reknowned for his journey but for the suffering the Gods put upon him...





-------------
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 11:39
I asked Vulkan to come and take a look at the Etruscan-Albanian transcriptions because I was truly curious about them being done correctly or just being a nonsense. Nobody else in tis forum could confirm if that was ok or not.

That doesn't mean that the alleged Albanian origins of Greek gods is necesarily correct or just a happy elaboration of someone with nothing better to do.

But if the Albano-Etruscan connection is confirmed, that would mean two things:
  1. Relevant to Etruscan origins: that there is a Balcano-Etruscan connection.
  2. Relevant to Albanian origins: that they have been dwelling in the area for very long (something, I must confess, I always suspected).
It means that we have Etruscan related peoples in several areas of Italy, in Lemnos and in the Balcans. We also have those gold tablets in Etruscan found recently in Thracian context.

How do we join the dots? Anyone...


-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: Phallanx
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 12:06
Well I understood why you asked for his assistance.

Anyway, there are a couple of problems, for example, there are many significant Etruscan words that don't exist in Albanian, for example..

Brother is similar to the IE 'phrater'...etc and is seen as "frater", "fratrom", "fratros" while the Albanian word is "velle"

breast is seen as "mam" and "mammar" in contrast to the Albanian " gji, sisë, zemer, ndjenja

father
is seen as "patre", "patrebum" and "tette"
in contrast to the Albanian baba, ate

son
seen as filos, filus, filvus in contrast to the Albanian bir and diale

daughter
seen as file in contrast to the Albanian bije , vadje

our
seen as "nos" in contrast to the Albanian jone , ine

And the list continues,,,,,,
There might be some similarities I might have missed, but this by no means proves a direct connection it could be due to a number of reasons..
I don't believe that a language like Albanian, being recorded in writting for the first time in the 15th cent. is a good basis to come to such conclusions, especially since we know of other language influence upon it, from Romanian to Turkish and Arab.
So these similarities may mean absolutely nothing at all, but then again...




-------------
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 13:41
Hmmm... did you notice that all those Etruscan words you mention are almost identical to their Latin counterparts? We need a serious linguist that knows Albanian and Latin and, of course, something of Etruscan.

One thing is quite clear: Etruscan is not Latin and these are two very diferent cultures, despite their intense neighborhood.

...

My own comments would be that:
  • baba is obviously a Turk loan, while tette and ate are similar enough.
  • a B->F (or F->B) transformation (Etruscan doesn't have B nor G) could connect bir and bija to filos and file, specially if the R also becomes L.
But I can't solve the puzzle on my limited knowledge of both tongues.


-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: vulkan02
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 15:59
Originally posted by Phallanx

Well I understood why you asked for his assistance.

Anyway, there are a couple of problems, for example, there are many significant Etruscan words that don't exist in Albanian, for example..

Brother is similar to the IE 'phrater'...etc and is seen as "frater", "fratrom", "fratros" while the Albanian word is "velle"

breast is seen as "mam" and "mammar" in contrast to the Albanian " gji, sisë, zemer, ndjenja

father
is seen as "patre", "patrebum" and "tette"
in contrast to the Albanian baba, ate

son
seen as filos, filus, filvus in contrast to the Albanian bir and diale

daughter
seen as file in contrast to the Albanian bije , vadje

our
seen as "nos" in contrast to the Albanian jone , ine

And the list continues,,,,,,
There might be some similarities I might have missed, but this by no means proves a direct connection it could be due to a number of reasons..
I don't believe that a language like Albanian, being recorded in writting for the first time in the 15th cent. is a good basis to come to such conclusions, especially since we know of other language influence upon it, from Romanian to Turkish and Arab.
So these similarities may mean absolutely nothing at all, but then again...


I was surprised it took you a full 27 minutes to intervene... I expected much sooner phallanx! Anyways like I said im not here to "claim" the Greek Gods or anything like that but then again the names and meanings that you specifiy such as Odysseus = hatred for the Gods are simply literal as well. I know that Illyrians had their own pantheon and the names of Illyrian Gods such as Tomor ( the mountain where Berat is situated on) the "Zeus" of Illyrian Gods do survive in Albania. Elbasan (even though it was founded by the Turks in 16th century) had a very important religious site where Illyrians worshipped the goddess Diana.
I didn't say the Illyrian "comes" from Etruscan or anything like that. All I suggested is that Etruscan, Illyrian and Thraco-Dacian, taking into perspective their relatively close location to one another might have exchanged and spoken similar words from migrations of tribes vica-versa.
Romanian influence?? You mean Roman influence... Romanian is a latin language which very few of the Thraco-Dacian words survive... at least we have almost one third of Illyrian in Albanian language. Arab influence i never heard of but yeah if some borrowed Turkish words come from Arabia then yeah you are semi-correct in that.


-------------
The beginning of a revolution is in reality the end of a belief - Le Bon
Destroy first and construction will look after itself - Mao


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 17:06
Is been evidenced the presence of the  pre-Indoeupean population in the balkan region. Under this circumstance minght examine any pre- IE remnats in the Albanian languagge.
the vigesimal system of number: nje-zet (twenty), dy-zet(forty), tre-zet(Sixty), kater-zet(eighty). the last two being attested by the arvanitas of greece and arbereshe of italy.(example from other language: French "quatrevingts" 80, danish  tresindstyve 60, firsindstyve 80)

Same scholalars have assumed that albanian has preseved also some other pre-IE words
Cabej:lepjete in c.p with greek  λαπαηον;  Vere, Vene  "wine"; shege " pomegranate"
Baric: (H)ardhi in c.p with basque "Ardeo"; bisht "
tail"; mal "mountain"; sh-kurre "scrub".


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 17:47


I am very sceptik for same word in this text. I search to explain theirs origin
Albanian form: ana, ane "Side"<  Proto-Albanian: (h)ant- < IE : h2(e)nt "front, face"
Albanian form: lus  "to beg" < Proto-Albanian: luti < Quasi-IE: luT-io < IE: leuT-
Albanian form: la "leave" < Proto-Albanian: ladn- < IE: leh1(i)-d
Albanian form: ap, jap "to give" < Proto-Albanian: apei- < IE: h2ep "to reach, get at/to, capture"

This words have IE origin and not come from pre-IE


Posted By: Mortaza
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 17:56

arzuhal is not albanian word.

Arzu means wish. I dont know origin of it. Maybe Turkish or persian.

Hal is also Turkish-persian-arabic(No idea) means position.

 



Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 19:09
Originally posted by neritan


Same scholalars have assumed that albanian has preseved also some other pre-IE words
Cabej:lepjete in c.p with greek  λαπαηον;  Vere, Vene  "wine"; shege " pomegranate"
Baric: (H)ardhi in c.p with basque "Ardeo"; bisht "
tail"; mal "mountain"; sh-kurre "scrub".


I don't understand what you're talking about here. The words seem not to connect with each other.

Also there's no Basque word "ardeo". There is ardo (wine), ardi (sheep), arto (millet, now maize) and arte (between, also a type of oak). The three first terms could come from the East, via the Mediterranean or other route, as neither product is original from the country, but were imported at some time. Ardi (sheep) and arto (corn, millet) should have come with the Mediterranean Neolithic, unless it's a Neolithic neologism based in some other word. Ahari (ram), for instance, resembles too much Greek aries to be just a coincidence.


-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: erci
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 19:14
Originally posted by Mortaza

arzuhal is not albanian word.

Arzu means wish. I dont know origin of it. Maybe Turkish or persian.

Hal is also Turkish-persian-arabic(No idea) means position.

 



both Arabic I think.Arzu means land I believe.(hal may be persian)


-------------
"When one hears such music, what can one say, but .... Salieri?"


Posted By: Phallanx
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 19:33
Well vulcan, sorry to keep you waiting but I do have other things to do than spend my time refuting ideas picked of propaganda sites.

Literal ?,    yeah, right, whatever you say...

Anyway, I'd prefer you try to give etymologies/meanings/connections to the Illyrian Gods than pick off some propaganda site a rediculous claim of Hellinic God names being Albanian.

Why don't you start with the names and myths of:

Medauros, depicted on horseback with a lance,
Vidasos, protector of their borders,
Thanos, the goddess connected to virgin maidens,
Armatos, the God of war,
Bindos, God of natural springs and sea,
Anzotika, Goddess of love,

As for my Etruscan comment it wasn't directed to anyone in specific but a general observasion I thought might add something to the discussion as it did, but you must have missed Maju's post.

As for Romanian, I know exactly what I said and you know exactly what I mean. We've done this before so let's not repeat it here, the original topic is still open as I recall. You can either take it there or address the linguists that came to this conclusion. see: H. Kronasser, R. Katicic, G. Alföldy

And yes, ARAB, everyone knows that the Ottoman language which is very  different to 'modern' Turkish was strongly influenced by Arabic so your language had a large number of Arab loan words even if that happened via the Ottomans..

neritan

What exactly is the Hellinic word you wrote cause I can't make anything of it??


-------------
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.


Posted By: TheodoreFelix
Date Posted: 18-Oct-2005 at 21:25
And yes, ARAB, everyone knows that the Ottoman language which is very different to 'modern' Turkish was strongly influenced by Arabic so your language had a large number of Arab loan words even if that happened via the Ottomans.


Large? Its not large, there are yes. But most are religous based.

-------------


Posted By: vulkan02
Date Posted: 19-Oct-2005 at 01:35
Originally posted by Phallanx

Well vulcan, sorry to keep you waiting but I do have other things to do than spend my time refuting ideas picked of propaganda sites.

Literal ?,    yeah, right, whatever you say...

well it is and you know it
Athina - without milk
Odysseus - hatred for the gods
Zeus - create a link (what is this html code?? )
Sure my explanation in Albanian might be sceptical but this is just ridiculous!

Anyway, I'd prefer you try to give etymologies/meanings/connections to the Illyrian Gods than pick off some propaganda site a rediculous claim of Hellinic God names being Albanian.

Why don't you start with the names and myths of:

Medauros, depicted on horseback with a lance,
Vidasos, protector of their borders,
Thanos, the goddess connected to virgin maidens,
Armatos, the God of war,
Bindos, God of natural springs and sea,
Anzotika, Goddess of love,

Im not a linguist phallanx im an engineer and who says these are Illyrian names in the first place??. Im not very familiar with the Illyrian pantheon like I told you before but if you want to know more take a trip to Albania and ask someone who is more familiar with this topic.
Anyways im gonna give it a go
 for the first one you didn't specify his role... a guy on horseback with a lance doesn't tell me much.
Vidasos - Vije (border) so the Border guy i guess
Thanos seems to be a Greek borrowing instead i doubt that's Illyrian.
Armatos - this is self-explanatory (arma - weapon) Armatos( to arm oneself in Albanian... probably Etruscan ancient IE word
Bindos -  Bindes(powerful, able to move men, could be related to the might of sea)... besides the Illyrian god of the sea was Redon... this is either borrowed from Thracian Bendis.
Anzotika - This one is probably a Thracian God instead of Illyrian... Thracians usually used a lot of "z's" in their Gods such as Hebeleyzis, Zalmoxis etc.


As for my Etruscan comment it wasn't directed to anyone in specific but a general observasion I thought might add something to the discussion as it did, but you must have missed Maju's post.

As for Romanian, I know exactly what I said and you know exactly what I mean. We've done this before so let's not repeat it here, the original topic is still open as I recall. You can either take it there or address the linguists that came to this conclusion. see: H. Kronasser, R. Katicic, G. Alföldy

Romanian is latin and Albanian has plenty of Latin words in it, im not saying anything to deny that. I think you mean that the forms of the words of Latin are relatively new(medival) and not Roman as far as i recall but i dont see any revelance it has to the topic we are discussing.

And yes, ARAB, everyone knows that the Ottoman language which is very  different to 'modern' Turkish was strongly influenced by Arabic so your language had a large number of Arab loan words even if that happened via the Ottomans..

Hmm thats exactly what i said... you are just playing  parrot

neritan

What exactly is the Hellinic word you wrote cause I can't make anything of it??


-------------
The beginning of a revolution is in reality the end of a belief - Le Bon
Destroy first and construction will look after itself - Mao


Posted By: Phallanx
Date Posted: 19-Oct-2005 at 08:15
Rediculous?? OK as you like..

I could have presented the 'classic' explanation that Zeus is nothing more than the possessive case of 'tou Dios'. That derives from the alleged IE root 'Dyeus' that gave the name to other Gods like the Latin 'Deus', Vedic 'Dyaus', the Germanic 'Tiwaz', Sanskrit Dydus...etc..
But that isn't good enough for me, since I'm against the IE theory and I try to look into the myth and see the connection of the name to it, I try to find the meaning..
As seen in the example of Athena, that is clearly connected to the myth or an older post pertaining to the name and deeds of Herakles. Of course they are open to rejection and alterations but 'Zot' ????

I mean please, give me a break.. but you classify something you can't comprehend as rediculous..

Anyway, I spent a couple of min' looking into this http://www.argjiro.net/fjalor/ - online dictionary that for some mysterious reason (I wonder why) doesn't acknowledge your "Vije" and "Bindes" but it must be some kind of technicality (I hope)..
The word "arma" actually proves nothing since it exists both in neighboring Latin, ater Italian, and both ancient and 'modern' Hellinic (not to mention French and English) many suggest a proto-IE root "ar"..but then again...
So as I said since the first written records of Albanian date to the 15th cent. this proves nothing, it could have been adopted at literally any time, from ancient to just a couple of centuries ago. We have no way of knowing..

From what I know, Vidasus as explained by W. Meid is connected to the old Germanic root "id" = tree/forest, also seen as "wid" and in Irish as "fid", so it might be an adoption from the Celtic tribes like that of the "Japodes" that had settled in the area..

As I said the topic is still open and the names of the linguists have been posted. Linguists that came to the conclusion that ancient loanwords from Latin in Albanian have the phonetic form of eastern Balkan Latin, i.e. of proto-Rumanian, and not of western Balkan Latin, i.e. of old Dalmatian Latin. Albanian, therefore, did not take its borrowings from Vulgar Latin as spoken in Illyria.

Parrot???
You said semi-correct, so I just cleared that I'm as usual 100% correct and cocky as always.


-------------
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 19-Oct-2005 at 13:29
Ok, guys, let's not start a flame war Greek vs. Albanian. In what regards to me Greeks and Albanians can have shared the Blacans since the eanderthal man. The point here is not if Albanians are Illyrians or Moesians or Thracians or Dacians or whatever. Same for Greeks. The pont is that Albanians could have been in the Balcans in the period we are talking about under another name or whatever and that they could be related to Etruscans and Lemnians, if those transcriptions are correct.

I'd like to focus in the Etrusco-Albanian connection and forget about the disputes on Greek gods. I'd also like to avoid foul language and derogative phrases and mocking attitudes. Only with outmost respect we can exchange and find the truth.

I truly would like Albanian speakers to say honestly if they can sit in front of an Etruscan transcription like those posted above and understand what is written in them more or less. That's the most important thing.

Thanks to all hose that are showing good will. I am truly interested in clearing up this matter as far as possible.


-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: vulkan02
Date Posted: 19-Oct-2005 at 16:05
Originally posted by Maju

Ok, guys, let's not start a flame war Greek vs. Albanian. In what regards to me Greeks and Albanians can have shared the Blacans since the eanderthal man. The point here is not if Albanians are Illyrians or Moesians or Thracians or Dacians or whatever. Same for Greeks. The pont is that Albanians could have been in the Balcans in the period we are talking about under another name or whatever and that they could be related to Etruscans and Lemnians, if those transcriptions are correct.

Thats the point that im trying to make too. The name might have not always been Albanian but rather differnet tribes with similar linguistic customs who eventually got preserved under one great surviving one over time.

Its hard and time consuming to fully try to understand what the whole statement means in Albanian. Does the author where you got it from offer this?

Well Ill tell you in one shot that no Albanian speaker will simply stay in front of the wall and tell you exactly what it means. This is a language that has gone extinct for more than 2000 years ago. A lot of changes can happen in all those years even if some part of it is indeed represented in Albanian. It also seems that the writting is written backwords or was the picture just taken that way??
One thing though is Albanian grammar is very complicated and a serious student of the language will tell you this.
Albanian has 2 forms(active and inactive) and 8 tenses per verb... that means you can conjugate certain words 16 different ways! There is tenses that im unsure if other neighboring languages have such as wishful, Indicative etc.
For example a simple word such as
Punoj - (to work)
wishful tense
Une(I) punofsha (I wish I could/can work)                          
Ti(you) punofsh
Ai/Ajo(he/she) punofte
Ne(Us) punofshim
Ju(You) punofsh*t
Ata/Ato(They) punofshin

I don't know if other languages use the type of conjugation such as the one described above. Could this have been Etruscan in origin??


-------------
The beginning of a revolution is in reality the end of a belief - Le Bon
Destroy first and construction will look after itself - Mao


Posted By: Constantine XI
Date Posted: 19-Oct-2005 at 16:51
Gents, let's stick to the original topic, no need for name calling or getting ourselves worked up into a flame war.

-------------


Posted By: vulkan02
Date Posted: 19-Oct-2005 at 17:10
Originally posted by Phallanx


Parrot???
You said semi-correct, so I just cleared that I'm as usual 100% correct and cocky as always.


While I can't criticize you from being cocky, people who think they are "100% correct" usually aren't.
You were 50% correct because these words didn't come straight from Arabia... they came from the Turks who borrowed and who have probably changed them around a little or a lot so there. And also one more thing: you usually laugh a lot when you read things you don't agree on... seems like you use a lot of emotional impulses in order to discredit the statements without first trying to reason through.


-------------
The beginning of a revolution is in reality the end of a belief - Le Bon
Destroy first and construction will look after itself - Mao


Posted By: Phallanx
Date Posted: 19-Oct-2005 at 19:30
Anyway, question.
Maju, since you're into the whole IE theory tell me :

Isn't Etruscan classified as a non-IE language and if so, how can there be enough or so many connections to give anyone the ability of translating a non-IE text/language with an IE language, is this feat  possible ???

Sorry to be so absolute on this, but this whole hipothesis reminds me of the older dumped theory of Albanians being the decendants of Pelasgians..


-------------
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 19-Oct-2005 at 20:10
Etruscan is classified as isolate. That means that they don't know of any sufficiently proven classification. But that doesn't mean that someone can't eventually come and say: I have found the relative and is... (Albanian??). Albanian itself is in the verge of IE classification. All trees of IE (that I've seen) show it as separate branch near the origins. Philology anyhow is not any exact science but rather is subject to opinions and heated discussions, specially when the subject is not clear. I mean everybody agrees in the existence of IE family but guess there may be one or two that say that Albanian is not correctly in it or that Etruscan should be. And IE is the family that has been best studied and that gathers the greatest agreement. When you come to Uralo-Altaic and things like that... buff!

-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 19-Oct-2005 at 20:27
Originally posted by vulkan02


Its hard and time consuming to fully try to understand what the whole statement means in Albanian. Does the author where you got it from offer this?


Sorry, I didn't post it originally. It was Albanian Trilogy, a suspended member that coiped and pasted all the time. In my post there is a link to his locked topic. It's all I can offer.

Well Ill tell you in one shot that no Albanian speaker will simply stay in front of the wall and tell you exactly what it means. This is a language that has gone extinct for more than 2000 years ago. A lot of changes can happen in all those years even if some part of it is indeed represented in Albanian. It also seems that the writting is written backwords or was the picture just taken that way??
One thing though is Albanian grammar is very complicated and a serious student of the language will tell you this.
Albanian has 2 forms(active and inactive) and 8 tenses per verb... that means you can conjugate certain words 16 different ways! There is tenses that im unsure if other neighboring languages have such as wishful, Indicative etc.
For example a simple word such as
Punoj - (to work)
wishful tense
Une(I) punofsha (I wish I could/can work)                          
Ti(you) punofsh
Ai/Ajo(he/she) punofte
Ne(Us) punofshim
Ju(You) punofsh*t
Ata/Ato(They) punofshin

I don't know if other languages use the type of conjugation such as the one described above. Could this have been Etruscan in origin??


I don't know enough about Etruscan. But Latin, which is influenced, definitively has many verbal conjugations, a trait that (unlike declinations) has passed to all Romance languages. Yet the wishful tense seems a little too far away.

Wikipedia says that:

Although some modern scholars claim that Etruscan is either distantly related to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indo-European" title="Indo-European - Indo-European , or even a member of the Indo-European branch of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anatolian_languages" title="Anatolian languages - Anatolian languages (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lemnian_language" title="Lemnian language - Lemnian language ), and others that it is part of some theoretical super-family like http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nostratic" title="Nostratic - Nostratic , there is no conclusive evidence of either.

In his Natural History ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_century" title="1st century - 1st century AD), http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pliny_the_Elder" title="Pliny the Elder - Pliny wrote about Alpine peoples: "The http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhaetia" title="Rhaetia - Rhaetians and the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vindelicia" title="Vindelicia - Vindelicans border with these [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noricum" title="Noricum - Noricans ], all distributed in numerous cities. The Gauls maintain that the Raetians descend from the Etruscans, pushed back under the leadership of Raetus." Thus linguists suggest that Etruscan ought to be related to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raetia" title="Raetia - Raetic and to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Camunic_language" title="Camunic language - Camunic , another ancient but minor Alpine language of northern Italy. Neither language was ever written, and suggestive traces in Roman placenames (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toponymy" title="Toponymy - toponymy ) and tribal designations have not been very informative yet.

The obscure roots of Etruscan continue to attract speculation from farther afield as well. A recent book by Italian linguist Mario Alinei assembles evidence supporting the contention of Hungarian scholars that Etruscan is distantly related to Magyar. In its support it is additionally suggested that the Etruscans were those Trojans on the European side of the Hellespont, whom a Greek naval blockade cut off from their compatriots on the Asian side and in Lemnos during the Trojan War. According to this theory, Etruscan's Ugric grammar also formed the grammatical basis of the Latin spoken by the patricians of Rome.

It also offer links to several glossaries of Etruscan words:

  • http://etruskisch.de/pgs/vc.htm - http://etruskisch.de/pgs/vc.htm
  • http://web.archive.org/web/20021213221136/http://www.netaxs.com/%7Esalvucci/VTLetrvocab.html - http://web.archive.org/web/20021213221136/http://www.netaxs. com/~salvucci/VTLetrvocab.html
  • http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2803/EtruscanGlossary.htm - http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Forum/2803/EtruscanGlossary. htm
And this list of links on mainstream and alternative works on etruscan interpretation: http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/etrweb/language.htm#mainstream - http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/etrweb/language.htm#mainstream (some are broken, some seem weird but others could be interesting).

Nothing on the Albano-Etruscan connection though.



-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 20-Oct-2005 at 14:11
Originally posted by Maju

Originally posted by neritan


Same scholalars have assumed that albanian has preseved also some other pre-IE words
Cabej:lepjete in c.p with greek  λαπαηον;  Vere, Vene  "wine"; shege " pomegranate"
Baric: (H)ardhi in c.p with basque "Ardeo"; bisht "
tail"; mal "mountain"; sh-kurre "scrub".

Also there's no Basque word "ardeo". There is ardo (wine), ardi (sheep), arto (millet, now maize) and arte (between, also a type of oak). The three first terms could come from the East, via the Mediterranean or other route, as neither product is original from the country, but were imported at some time. Ardi (sheep) and arto (corn, millet) should have come with the Mediterranean Neolithic, unless it's a Neolithic neologism based in some other word. Ahari (ram), for instance, resembles too much Greek aries to be just a coincidence.

you're right. The word is  ardao 'wine'
http://members.tripod.com/%7EGroznijat/balkan/ehamp.html#9. - http://members.tripod.com/~Groznijat/balkan/ehamp.html#9.

neritan

What exactly is the Hellinic word you wrote cause I can't make anything of it??



>>





Posted By: DayI
Date Posted: 20-Oct-2005 at 14:26
i dunno but when i first saw an Etruscan script, it does very look like Gok Turk script, sorry if im misleading someone.

-------------
Bu mıntıka'nın Dayı'sı
http://imageshack.us - [IMG - http://www.allempires.com/forum/uploads/DayI/2006-03-17_164450_bscap021.jpg -


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 20-Oct-2005 at 14:43
Originally posted by Phallanx


Parrot???
You said semi-correct, so I just cleared that I'm as usual 100% correct and cocky as always.

100% correct
Look this http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=2140&PN=2&TPN=1 - your post PHALLANX. Is same logic of Albanian-Etruscan connection



Posted By: Phallanx
Date Posted: 20-Oct-2005 at 15:02
neritan

As I told vulcan, the topic is still open, if either of you wish, we can take it there..



Again it seems like I'm missing something. Is this 1 word or 3 (I see gaps between la-pa-uon). In either way, one or three words, what does it mean and what is the point???

If this is connected to the word 'wine' then the Proto-IE origin of the word seems to be the Semitic "wayn".  Which was "Wo No" in Linear B' aka Mycenean and "Oinos" in ancient.. so what is this word??


-------------
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.


Posted By: vulkan02
Date Posted: 20-Oct-2005 at 15:43
Originally posted by Phallanx

neritan

As I told vulcan, the topic is still open, if either of you wish, we can take it there..



Thanks for the invitation  ...but Id rather not waste my time with those idiotic rip-off's from Greek and Macedonian propaganda sites.


-------------
The beginning of a revolution is in reality the end of a belief - Le Bon
Destroy first and construction will look after itself - Mao


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 20-Oct-2005 at 16:19
Originally posted by neritan

Originally posted by Maju

Originally posted by neritan


Same scholalars have assumed that albanian has preseved also some other pre-IE words
Cabej:lepjete in c.p with greek  λαπαηον;  Vere, Vene  "wine"; shege " pomegranate"
Baric: (H)ardhi in c.p with basque "Ardeo"; bisht "
tail"; mal "mountain"; sh-kurre "scrub".

Also there's no Basque word "ardeo". There is ardo (wine), ardi (sheep), arto (millet, now maize) and arte (between, also a type of oak). The three first terms could come from the East, via the Mediterranean or other route, as neither product is original from the country, but were imported at some time. Ardi (sheep) and arto (corn, millet) should have come with the Mediterranean Neolithic, unless it's a Neolithic neologism based in some other word. Ahari (ram), for instance, resembles too much Greek aries to be just a coincidence.

you're right. The word is  ardao 'wine'
http://members.tripod.com/%7EGroznijat/balkan/ehamp.html#9. - http://members.tripod.com/~Groznijat/balkan/ehamp.html#9.



ARDOA is the nominative singular intransitive or the direct object (sing.)  declination of ARDO (wine). There's no ARDAO. In Basque you decline nouns by adding them suffixes, most typical is -A but also -AK (nominative intransitive plural, direct object plural or nominative transitive singular), -EK (nom. trans. plural), etc. But, like in other languages, nouns appear in the dictionary in their radical form, in this case ARDO.

Do you mean that ARDHI in Albanian means also wine?

Ardo must be rather old, because other beverages have composed names derived from it: garagardo = beer (garagar = barley <- gari = wheat), sagardo = cider (sagar = apple).


-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 20-Oct-2005 at 16:36
(h)ardhi in albanian means grapewine.
Also other connection with basque is: Albanian bisht 'tail' : Basque buztan.
 


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 20-Oct-2005 at 19:00
Well grape is actually mahats. And the buztan-bisht connection... well, I'm not sure what to think. Vowels are meaningful in Basque.

Anyhow, such coincidences can't be the base of anything. I also found some other strange coincidences with some Serbo-Croat words, particularly gora (mountain) and gore (up). Gora in Basque is up, upwards, viva!, being a clear ethimologically Basque word (goi+ra: to the high) The other connection was reka (river) and erreka (creek, small river) but this can well be an IE import into Basque. Anyhow you can't build much of a theory with just two words.

Btw, I just found, looking in the dictionary, that mahatsardo (wine of grapes) does exist, so maybe ardo orignally meant just alcoholic drink.


-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: vulkan02
Date Posted: 20-Oct-2005 at 19:07
Rreke is also small stream in Albanian.
Rrjedh means to stream,  streaming down.


-------------
The beginning of a revolution is in reality the end of a belief - Le Bon
Destroy first and construction will look after itself - Mao


Posted By: Phallanx
Date Posted: 20-Oct-2005 at 19:33
Thanks for the invitation  ...but Id rather not waste my time with those idiotic rip-off's from Greek and Macedonian propaganda sites.


Rip-offs, you're talking to me not to yourself, so please make a better choice of expressions, that is your tactic, whle I present personal ideas/research that isn't based nor supported by the most hard-core nationalists you do the exact opposite..

As for Makedones... I once again suggest you choose your words wisely if you want to have any kind of future in the EU, unless this is nothing but yet another provocation in lack of arguments... (your standard tactic)

neritan

Why did you avoid giving me a simple answer (unless there isn't one) , please do in your next post... thanks


-------------
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 21-Oct-2005 at 06:18
You're really a nasty Greek nationalist. Please stop kidnapping EU for your petty claims. Everybody outside Greece uses the name Macedonians for the people of the Republic. You must learn to be more tolerant. 

-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 21-Oct-2005 at 06:53
Lepjate in english is 'sorrel'

is this plant



Posted By: Phallanx
Date Posted: 21-Oct-2005 at 07:17
Originally posted by Maju

You're really a nasty Greek nationalist. Please stop kidnapping EU for your petty claims. Everybody outside Greece uses the name Macedonians for the people of the Republic. You must learn to be more tolerant. 


What does nationalism have to do with an internationally acknowledged name???

Since 1993 the official name is FYROM "Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia" as decided by the United Nations and later adopted by EU, NATO...etc.

So how can you title an international decision "petty claims". What others name the country is beyond the point and literally of NO interest to me. I abide by international decisions/agreements, if you or anyone else finds this nationalistic, then you must address those that made the decision about the name and not me for abiding to the decision in question..


-------------
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.


Posted By: Maju
Date Posted: 21-Oct-2005 at 07:24
Blah, blah, blah. It has to do. But I'm not going to fall in hickjacking this topic on such a silly unrelated discussion. 

-------------

NO GOD, NO MASTER!


Posted By: vulkan02
Date Posted: 21-Oct-2005 at 18:43
Originally posted by Maju

You're really a nasty Greek nationalist. Please stop kidnapping EU for your petty claims. Everybody outside Greece uses the name Macedonians for the people of the Republic. You must learn to be more tolerant. 


and he though I provoked him!


-------------
The beginning of a revolution is in reality the end of a belief - Le Bon
Destroy first and construction will look after itself - Mao


Posted By: vulkan02
Date Posted: 21-Oct-2005 at 18:56
Originally posted by Phallanx

Thanks for the invitation  ...but Id rather not waste my time with those idiotic rip-off's from Greek and Macedonian propaganda sites.


Rip-offs, you're talking to me not to yourself, so please make a better choice of expressions, that is your tactic, whle I present personal ideas/research that isn't based nor supported by the most hard-core nationalists you do the exact opposite..

As for Makedones... I once again suggest you choose your words wisely if you want to have any kind of future in the EU, unless this is nothing but yet another provocation in lack of arguments... (your standard tactic)



Well you the one who always lamblasted me for using "FYROManian" propaganda now don't get too upset when I can tell you doing the same.

As for the EU thing I personally HOPE that Albania never joins. Why should we be Germany's and its sly advisor France, b^%$#es like the rest of the 23 "nations" in there??

I got my tactics you got your info... it all balances out


-------------
The beginning of a revolution is in reality the end of a belief - Le Bon
Destroy first and construction will look after itself - Mao


Posted By: arfunda
Date Posted: 22-Oct-2005 at 07:56

I have a book of Bilge Umar[1] telling the etymologies of the place (town, city, river, mountain etc) names in chemas-microsoft-comfficemarttags" />lace wt="on">Anatolialace>. Many historical names have Luwian origins. I tried to summarisethe origin of some names:chemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" />>>

> >

t="on">lace wt="on">Etrurialace>: Adria is a city built by Etrusci. Name “Adria” comes from the name of  “God Adra” (Adria/Adriatic sea also comes from the same origin). Etrusci seem to be believed in God Adra. “t="on">lace wt="on">Etrurialace>” is a name pronounced by Latin languages. t="on">Etruria comes from “Atruria” which is derived from “Atr(a)-lace wt="on">t="on">urlace>(a)-ia” meaning “Holy  homeland of Adra”.>>

Etrusci (name of people living t="on">Etruria) comes from the name “Atra-Ska” meaning “lace wt="on">laceType wt="on">peninsulalaceType> of laceName wt="on">AdralaceName>lace>” (Umar, 1993: p.257).>>

> >

Adra/Atra/Odra/Otra: It is a name in Luwian and other similar consecutive Anatolian languages of 1000 BC and in Pelasgos language. Adra means “man, husband”. Adra is the name of the husband of “mother Goddess” and of head of the gods (Umar, 1993: p.18).>>

> >

In the Old Testament (II Kings, XVII 31), it is told that people of Sefervaim who are exiled to Palestine by Sargon (Asyrrian King) also had believed in a Goddess and God whose names were Anammelekekh (angel Ana) and Adrammelekh (angel Adra) (Umar, 1993: p.18). >>

> >

In lace wt="on">Anatolialace> there are many historical names derived from Adra. Here are other historical names except lace wt="on">Anatolialace>:>>

1.                  Adra: A city in t="on">Spain, in the east of lace wt="on">t="on">Granadalace>. The name is thought to come from Luwian name Adra, There are also some other Luwian geographical historical names in t="on">Spain: Munda, Tartessos, lace wt="on">Ebrolace>.>>

2.                   Adra: A city in Arabia Petra (Stony Arabia).>>

3.                  Adra: Derat, which is the biggest city of t="on">Havran Region in the east of lace wt="on">laceName wt="on">JordarlaceName> laceType wt="on">RiverlaceType>lace>, had been named as Adra in ancient times.>>

4.                  Adra (written as Hadra in Latin): Ptolemaios (2 XVI 6) talks about this city in Liburnia Region. Today it is in the region of t="on">lace wt="on">Bosnialace>. (Umar, 1993: p.19)>>

> >

Adrama: Is is a place in the east of lace wt="on">Jordan Riverlace>, in Batenea. It is also a Luwian name deriving from “Adra-(u)ma” meaning “Adra’s people”.>>

> >

Edremit: It is a town in north Aegean cost of Anotolia and it is the name of the gulf. Edremit is in the south of t="on">lace wt="on">Troylace>. Edremit comes from Adramytteion which is the Hellenic pronunciation of the Luwian name “Adra-mut” meaning “lace wt="on">laceType wt="on">valleylaceType> of laceName wt="on">AdralaceName>lace>”. Adramut had been built first in a valley in that region (Umar, 1993: p.19).>>

> >

Adranos: It is the Hellenic pronunciation of the Luwian name Adrana which is derived from “Adra-(wa)na” meaning “lace wt="on">laceType wt="on">landlaceType> of laceName wt="on">AdralaceName>lace>”. Adranos was the name of many other places in Anatolia and it was the name of a city of antique lace wt="on">tate wt="on">Sicilytate>lace> (Umar, 1993: p.19-20).>>

> >

Troia. It is told that the name Troia was written with “omicron” by Ions and with “omega” by Dors of Hellens. The origin of name was Luwian  Truwa deriving from “(A)dr(a)-uwa” meaning “place and lace wt="on">laceType wt="on">templelaceType> of laceName wt="on">AdralaceName>lace>” (Umar, 1993: p.801).>>

> >

As you see, Adra is an Anatolian God and is the husband/man of Anatolian mother Goddess Ma. There are many historical geographical names in lace wt="on">Anatolialace> derived from the Luwian names  Adra and Ma. I think people migrating from lace wt="on">Anatolialace> had taken their God’s name near and had given the name to their new lands.>>

> >

> >



Posted By: arfunda
Date Posted: 22-Oct-2005 at 08:07

Dear frieends I couldn't understand why there are unwanted characters in my text. Sorry. I try to repost it again:

 

I have a book of Bilge Umar[1] telling the etymologies of the place (town, city, river, mountain etc) names in chemas-microsoft-comfficemarttags" />lace wt="on">Anatolialace>. Many historical names have Luwian origins. I tried to summarise the origin of some names:chemas-microsoft-comfficeffice" />>>

> >

t="on">lace wt="on">Etrurialace>: Adria is a city built by Etrusci. Name "Adria" comes from the name of  "God Adra" (Adria/Adriatic sea also comes from the same origin). Etrusci seem to be believed in God Adra. "t="on">lace wt="on">Etruria"lace> is a name pronounced by Latin languages. t="on">Etruria comes from "Atruria" which is derived from "Atr(a)-lace wt="on">t="on">urlace>(a)-ia" meaning "Holy  homeland of Adra".>>

Etrusci (name of people living t="on">Etruria) comes from the name "Atra-Ska" meaning "lace wt="on">laceType wt="on">peninsulalaceType> of laceName wt="on">Adra"laceName>lace> (Umar, 1993: p.257).

> >

Adra/Atra/Odra/Otra: It is a name in Luwian and other similar consecutive Anatolian languages of 1000 BC and in Pelasgos language. Adra means "man, husband". Adra is the name of the husband of "mother Goddess" and of head of the gods (Umar, 1993: p.18).>>

> >

In the Old Testament (II Kings, XVII 31), it is told that people of Sefervaim who are exiled to Palestine by Sargon (Asyrrian King) also had believed in a Goddess and God whose names were Anammelekekh (angel Ana) and Adrammelekh (angel Adra) (Umar, 1993: p.18). >>

> >

In lace wt="on">Anatolialace> there are many historical names derived from Adra. Here are other historical names except lace wt="on">Anatolialace>:>>

1.                  Adra: A city in t="on">Spain, in the east of lace wt="on">t="on">Granadalace>. The name is thought to come from Luwian name Adra, There are also some other Luwian geographical historical names in t="on">Spain: Munda, Tartessos, lace wt="on">Ebrolace>.>>

2.                   Adra: A city in Arabia Petra (Stony Arabia).>>

3.                  Adra: Derat, which is the biggest city of t="on">Havran Region in the east of lace wt="on">laceName wt="on">JordanlaceName> laceType wt="on">RiverlaceType>lace>, had been named as Adra in ancient times.>>

4.                  Adra (written as Hadra in Latin): Ptolemaios (2 XVI 6) talks about this city in Liburnia Region. Today it is in the region of t="on">lace wt="on">Bosnialace>. (Umar, 1993: p.19)>>

> >

Adrama: Is is a place in the east of lace wt="on">Jordan Riverlace>, in Batenea. It is also a Luwian name deriving from “Adra-(u)ma” meaning “Adra’s people”.>>

> >

Edremit: It is a town in north Aegean cost of Anotolia and it is the name of the gulf. Edremit is in the south of t="on">lace wt="on">Troylace>. Edremit comes from Adramytteion which is the Hellenic pronunciation of the Luwian name "Adra-mut" meaning "lace wt="on">laceType wt="on">valleylaceType> of laceName wt="on">Adra"laceName>lace>. Adramut had been built first in a valley in that region (Umar, 1993: p.19).>>

> >

Adranos: It is the Hellenic pronunciation of the Luwian name Adrana which is derived from "Adra-(wa)-na" meaning "llace wt="on">laceType wt="on">andlaceType> of laceName wt="on">Adra"laceName>lace>. Adranos was the name of many other places in Anatolia and it was the name of a city of antique lace wt="on">tate wt="on">Sicilytate>lace> (Umar, 1993: p.19-20).>>

> >

Troia: It is told that the name Troia was written with "omicron" by Ions and with "omega" by Dors of Hellens. The origin of name was Luwian  Truwa deriving from "(A)dr(a)-uwa" meaning "place and lace wt="on">laceType wt="on">templelaceType> of laceName wt="on">Adra"laceName>lace> (Umar, 1993: p.801).>>

> >

As you see, Adra is an Anatolian God and is the husband/man of Anatolian mother Goddess Ma. There are many historical geographical names in lace wt="on">Anatolialace> derived from the Luwian names  Adra and Ma. I think people migrating from lace wt="on">Anatolialace> had taken their God’s name near and had given the name to their new lands.>>

> >

> >



Posted By: arfunda
Date Posted: 22-Oct-2005 at 08:10

http://www.allempires.com/forum/uploads/arfunda/2005-10-22_080929_Truva-Etrüsk.doc - 2005-10-22_080929_Truva-Etrüsk.doc

I am sorry. I try to send my text again.



Posted By: Phallanx
Date Posted: 22-Oct-2005 at 19:52
Name "Adria" comes from the name of  "God Adra" (Adria/Adriatic sea also comes from the same origin). Etrusci seem to be believed in God Adra.


Never really heard of this God Adra before.. nor anything about the origin of the Adriatic sea from his name..

The way I know it, the name of the Adriatic sea and the names Adrian (also seen Adrianus) and Adria. derive from the Latin word "atrum" meaning dark/black..


-------------
To the gods we mortals are all ignorant.Those old traditions from our ancestors, the ones we've had as long as time itself, no argument will ever overthrow, in spite of subtleties sharp minds invent.


Posted By: Constantine XI
Date Posted: 22-Oct-2005 at 20:57
This is just a completely wild guess, but could they have named the Adriatic after Emperor Hadrian (Hadriatic)? It might not be too implausible, they were happy naming Edirne (Adrianople, Hadrianopolis) after him. Why not name a whole sea after yourself?

-------------


Posted By: arfunda
Date Posted: 23-Oct-2005 at 06:34

"When the  Roman emperor Hadrian (117-138)  travelled to  the  East in  123-124,  he commanded that new buildings be constructed in the town of Odrysai, also known as Uscudama. The town grew into a city, and became one of the most important inthe Roman Empire. It was now thought worthy to take the name of the emperor who had so honoured the city, and Odrysai was re-named Hadrianopolis (Adrianopolis), Hadrian's city."  ( http://www.discoverturkey.com/english/haberler/yeni/osmanli-edirne.html - http://www.discoverturkey.com/english/haberler/yeni/osmanli- edirne.html )

Before the name Adrianapolis, the city had been named as "Odrysai" and people of the city had been called as "Odrysa" in Hellen language. The etimology of the name is "Odr(a)-u(wa)-(as)sa" which is a Luwian name and means "the temple place of Odra/Adra" (Umar, 1993: p.608).

You know Luwian was one of the three Indo-European languages used in Anatolia during the Hittite civilisation. The other languages were Pala and Nesi language. Nesi was the original name that was used by Hittites to call themselves (Akurgal, Ekrem, 1997, Anadolu Kültür Tarihi (Anatolian Culture History), TÜBİTAK Yayınları, Ankara, Turkey, p.51)

Luwian is accepted as the only long living language of Ancient Anatolian languages. The hieroglyph luwian had been used between 2000-1000 BC (Alp, Sedat, (2000), Hitit Çağında Anadolu (Anatolia of Hittite Era), TÜBİTAK Yayınları, Ankara, p.1). Luwian had been talken in western and sothern parts of Anatolia in 2000 BC. A seal of 2000 BC, which belonged to Hittites and in Luwian language, was found in Troia during arceological digs . It shows that Luwians also lived in Troia in 2000 BC. (Alp, 2000: p.14)

 Of course there are many Hellenic names similar to Luwian names. That isn't suprising, because both languages are Indo-European. Many Luwian names had been used in Anatolia, in Aegean islands, in Girit, in Greece and in Italy. This shows that these people had used similar languages. The name of geooraphical places is accepted by arcologists "to be conservative " . There are similarities in Latin and Luwian language (Alp, 2000: p, 14) For centuries many names were thought to be -of course- Latin and Hellenic origin because İt was not known that tahre was a Hittite and a Luwian civilisation in Anatolia till 1906. Luwian, Pale and Hittite (Nesi) languages were lost languages. Nobody knew them. After 1906 more than 30 000 cuneiform writings were found. When Luwian writings were read and the language was learnt, the origins of many names were solved.



Posted By: arfunda
Date Posted: 23-Oct-2005 at 13:00

Maju and Sharrukin

I want to add a few notes about Lydian language. Luwian had been talked between 2000-1000 BC. Lydian had been talked since 1000 BC in western Anotolia. After the demolish of Great Hittite Empire in 1200 BC, the first written sources of in Lydian language began to appear in 700 BC. Lydian is more similar to Hittite language. Texts in Lydian had been written with Lydian alphabet which is influenced by Greek alphabet. Lydian is thought to be a mixed language of the native people of Anatolia who are talking Luwian and Hittite languages and of other ethnicities who came from west to costs of Anatolia during/and after the Miken colonisation. (Alp, 2000: p.29)




Print Page | Close Window

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz - http://www.webwizguide.com