Origins of Etruscans: Herodotus v Dionysius of Halicarnassus

[guy]

The origins of the enigmatic Etruscans has long been debated. The Greek historian Herodotus (485-425 BCE) supported the Lydian origin (in western Anatolia) of the Etruscans. Dionysius of Halicarnassus (60-7 BCE) supported the Italian (autochthonous) origins of the Etruscans.

The latest research casts doubt on the controversial evidence that the Etruscans originated from Anatolia (modern-day Turkey). Some initial research had supported that theory, however.

 

Quote

”Herodotus' theory, much criticised by subsequent historians, states that the Etruscans emigrated from the ancient region of Lydia, on what is now the southern coast of Turkey, because of a long-running famine. Half the population was sent by the king to look for a better life elsewhere, says his account, and sailed from Smyrna (now Izmir) until they reached Umbria in Italy.

"We think that our research provides convincing proof that Herodotus was right", says Professor Piazza, "and that the Etruscans did indeed arrive from ancient Lydia.”

 

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/06/070616191637.htm

Research from cattle even showed a genetic link with Turkey.

Settled? Hardly. Here is some new research:
 

Quote

“The current study, with a time transect of ancient genomic information spanning almost 2000 years collected from 12 archaeological sites, resolves lingering questions about Etruscan origins, showing no evidence for a recent population movement from Anatolia. In fact, the Etruscans shared the genetic profile of the Latins living in nearby Rome, with a large proportion of their genetic profiles coming from steppe-related ancestry that arrived in the region during the Bronze Age.”

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/09/210924182513.htm

Summary: The origins of the mysterious Etruscans is still debated. The latest research suggests that the Etruscans had an Italian origin from an ancient indigenous people and not from Anatolia. 

Whether the Etruscans originated from Anatolia or were indigenous peoples really doesn’t matter. What is exciting is the use of modern technology to shed light on ancient societies.

Edited September 30, 2021 by guy

[guy]

Another article on the subject:

“‘The Etruscans look indistinguishable from Latins, and they also carry a high proportion of steppe ancestry,’  Posth tells Andrew Curry of Science magazine.

The civilization’s still mostly indecipherable language is noticeably different from other societies of that era but bears some commonalities with Greek, including similar alphabets.“

 

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/dna-analysis-shows-early-etruscans-were-homegrown-180978772/

Edited November 24, 2021 by guy

[guy]

A slightly different interpretation of the research:
 

Quote

 

“The results of the analysis show that:

(i) individuals associated with the Etruscan culture carried a high proportion of steppe-related ancestry, despite speaking a non-Indo-European language; if the Etruscan language was indeed a relict language that predated Bronze Age expansions, then it would represent one of the rare examples of language continuity despite extensive genetic discontinuity; the steppe-related ancestry in Etruscans may have been mediated by Bronze Age Italic speakers, possibly through a prolonged admixture process resulting in a partial language shift;

(ii) after the Bronze Age admixture, the Etruscan-related gene pool remained generally homogeneous for almost 800 years, notwithstanding the sporadic presence of individuals of likely Near Eastern, northern African, and central European origins;

(iii) eastern Mediterranean ancestries replaced a large portion of the Etruscan-related genetic profile during the Roman Imperial period;

(iv) a substantial genetic input from northern European ancestries was introduced during the Early Middle Ages, possibly through the spread of Germanic tribes into the Italian peninsula;

(v) the genetic makeup of present-day populations from central and southern Italy was mostly in place by the end of the 1st millennium CE.“

 

 

 

http://www.sci-news.com/archaeology/etruscans-origin-10105.html

Edited November 24, 2021 by guy

[guy]

Here is what I believe to be the original article.

https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciadv.abi7673
 

Reviewing this article, I found it incredibly difficult to follow at times. There could be a few challenges with the article.

 Part of the difficulty for me might come from the fact that this is from an international group of brilliant scientists for whom English might not be a primary language.

Another problem is that many conclusions are made based on the analysis of only 82 ancient individuals. Here is a quote from the article:

Quote

”These quality controls resulted in a final sample set of 82 individuals that were grouped on the basis of their radiocarbon dates and genetic affinities into three time intervals: 48 individuals from 800 to 1 BCE (Iron Age and Roman Republic), 6 individuals from 1 to 500 CE (Imperial period), and 28 individuals from 500 to 1000 CE (12 from central Italy and 16 from southern Italy).“

Based on this small study, it would be difficult to draw conclusions on ethnic origination, ancient migration, and linguistic development.

Finally, the problem may be only me. After reading scientific articles almost daily for more than three decades, I now lose my patience for more abstruse articles. Early-onset dementia?

 

Edited November 24, 2021 by guy

[caldrail]

No, it's a mental state brought on by increasing maturity and a belief we know more than anyone else