Posted on 06/17/2007 4:55:52 PM PDT by blam
Contact: Mary Rice
mary@mrcommunication.org
European Society of Human Genetics
Ancient Etruscans were immigrants from Anatolia, or what is now Turkey
Geneticists find the final piece in the puzzle
Nice, France: The long-running controversy about the origins of the Etruscan people appears to be very close to being settled once and for all, a geneticist will tell the annual conference of the European Society of Human Genetics today. Professor Alberto Piazza, from the University of Turin, Italy, will say that there is overwhelming evidence that the Etruscans, whose brilliant civilisation flourished 3000 years ago in what is now Tuscany, were settlers from old Anatolia (now in southern Turkey).
Etruscan culture was very advanced and quite different from other known Italian cultures that flourished at the same time, and highly influential in the development of Roman civilisation. Its origins have been debated by archaeologists, historians and linguists since time immemorial. Three main theories have emerged: that the Etruscans came from Anatolia, Southern Turkey, as propounded by the Greek historian Herotodus; that they were indigenous to the region and developed from the Iron Age Villanovan society, as suggested by another Greek historian, Dionysius of Halicarnassus; or that they originated from Northern Europe.
Now modern genetic techniques have given scientists the tools to answer this puzzle. Professor Piazza and his colleagues set out to study genetic samples from three present-day Italian populations living in Murlo, Volterra, and Casentino in Tuscany, central Italy. “We already knew that people living in this area were genetically different from those in the surrounding regions”, he says. “Murlo and Volterra are among the most archaeologically important Etruscan sites in a region of Tuscany also known for having Etruscan-derived place names and local dialects. The Casentino valley sample was taken from an area bordering the area where Etruscan influence has been preserved.”
The scientists compared DNA samples taken from healthy males living in Tuscany, Northern Italy, the Southern Balkans, the island of Lemnos in Greece, and the Italian islands of Sicily and Sardinia. The Tuscan samples were taken from individuals who had lived in the area for at least three generations, and were selected on the basis of their surnames, which were required to have a geographical distribution not extending beyond the linguistic area of sampling. The samples were compared with data from modern Turkish, South Italian, European and Middle-Eastern populations.
“We found that the DNA samples from individuals from Murlo and Volterra were more closely related those from near Eastern people than those of the other Italian samples”, says Professor Piazza. “In Murlo particularly, one genetic variant is shared only by people from Turkey, and, of the samples we obtained, the Tuscan ones also show the closest affinity with those from Lemnos.”
Scientists had previously shown this same relationship for mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) in order to analyse female lineages. And in a further study, analysis of mtDNA of ancient breeds of cattle still living in the former Etruria found that they too were related to breeds currently living in the near East.
The history of the Etruscans extends before the Iron Age to the end of the Roman Republic or from c. 1200 BC to c. 100BC Many archaeological sites of the major Etruscan cities were continuously occupied since the Iron Age, and the people who lived in the Etruria region did not appear suddenly, nor did they suddenly start to speak Etruscan. Rather they learned to write from their Greek neighbours and thus revealed their language. Archaeologists and linguists are in agreement that the Etruscans had been developing their culture and language in situ before the first historical record of their existence.
“But the question that remained to be answered was – how long was this process between pre-history and history"” says Professor Piazza. In 1885 a stele carrying an inscription in a pre-Greek language was found on the island of Lemnos, and dated to about the 6th century BC. Philologists agree that this has many similarities with the Etruscan language both in its form and structure and its vocabulary. But genetic links between the two regions have been difficult to find until now.
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. However, to be 100% certain we intend to sample other villages in Tuscany, and also to test whether there is a genetic continuity between the ancient Etruscans and modern-day Tuscans. This will have to be done by extracting DNA from fossils; this has been tried before but the technique for doing so has proved to be very difficult.”
“Interestingly, this study of historical origins will give us some pointers for carrying out case-control studies of disease today,” says Professor Piazza. “In order to obtain a reliable result, we had to select the control population much more carefully that would normally be done, and we believe that this kind of careful selection would also help in studies of complex genetic diseases.”
“There is always more truth to ancient legend and myth than most people give it credit for.”
I’ll say. For example, I have dated Medusa a number of times.
One of the other two links shows that.
I’m no historianologist but hasn’t Herotodos turned out to be right more than those who contradict him?
...but both civilizations were from pre-iron age Anatolia and so probably had contact.
Herodotus has been disliked by some down the centuries, and there are things in his book for some to criticize, but he gives four different ideas (three he heard about in Egypt, one that he made up) about the out-of-season flood phase of the Nile, and the correct one is in there; he tells us all that the circumnavigators of Africa saw the Sun to the north, even though he states he doesn’t believe this; he tells us that the Atlantic is connected to the Erythraean Sea, in which he includes the Gulf of Aqaba, Gulf of Suez, Persian Gulf, and Indian Ocean; and records plenty of other stuff which is true. Often he tells what he’s seen with his own eyes, and differentiates it from what he was told. And of course, he’s 2500 years closer than we are. :’)
Agreed.
The language of the Etruscan is a mystery to this day. Nobody knows what it is related to, like Ainu, Basque, and Sumerian.
Old news. Heard about this from my tour guide when I was 15.
Ping...
Interesting! I’d like to check out this study.
On the other side of Greek historians was Dionysius of Halicarnassus, who was the first to suggest that the Etruscans were indigenous...mostly because (and not a bad reason either), they didn’t agree in language or customs with any people they were said to be related to in Anatolia.
Massimo Pallottino, the famed Etruscologist, has pointed out that whatever the origins of the Etruscan people, their civilization as we know it developed in Italy, and there I think he’s quite right.
Good point about the Etruscan vases with the Aeneas legend...it’s definitely a VERY old story in Italy.
Etruscan, on the other hand, was a non-Indo-European language, which had no surviving relatives in Asia Minor in the era of Dionysius of Halicarnassus, at least none that we know of. Its only close relative is the language which was spoken on Lemnos before the Greek conquest--how the Lemnian language was so similar to Etruscan is a difficult thing to explain for those who think Etruscan was indigenous to Italy. In Greek tradition the earlier inhabitants of Lemnos were "Pelasgians." Who the Pelasgians were is not clearly understood--there have been lots of theories, including that they were the same as the Philistines (who seem to have come from the Aegean before settling in historic Philistia).
Etruscan is not related to the other langauges of Italy. Usually when you have a situation like that (e.g. the case of Basque) it's because a language happened to survive in a mountainous or inaccessible area--but the Etruscan language is found in one of the most desirable areas of Italy, the kind of place an invading group might have conquered.
Italian scholars have tended to favor the theory that Etruscan was indigenous to Italy rather than brought in from the east.
Right. Etruscan may have a connection with Rhaetic in the Alps, but that’s not quite established, and the only sure connection is Lemnian, as you mention. I did a little amateur’s analysis on the Lemnian stele years ago, with Bonfante’s Etruscan grammar in hand.
There is really not that much difference at all between the two idioms...they look to me like two slightly different dialects. From what I could see, they didn’t look like languages that had been separated for thousands of years—which sort of puts a crimp in the idea that they represent a pre-Indo-European substrate. Impressionistically, I’d say that the separation between them looks to be only on the order of 500 years or so.
And your point about the languages retreating to the hills and inaccessible areas is certainly well-taken. That’s exactly what happened to Oscan, as the Samnites were deprived of the coasts by Greeks and later Romans.
If the Etruscan parent population had died out by the time of Dionysius, that would explain why he didn’t see any connection. I’m pretty sure Lemnos already lost their language several hundred years prior to his time.
Herodotus in 6.136-140 tells how Miltiades (later hero of the battle of Marathon) conquered Lemnos for Athens. His account implies that some of the Lemnians were forced to leave the island, but maybe not all of them.
Interesting! And whoever remained would have been progressively hellenized I guess.
Immigrants, huh? Are we going to see this term used everywhere now to try to desensitize us to it?
Can the migration patterns of civiliations from thousands of years ago fit today's definition of "immigrants?"
-PJ
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.