[HN Gopher] New work sheds light on the Etruscans, who may have ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       New work sheds light on the Etruscans, who may have founded Rome
        
       Author : demail
       Score  : 131 points
       Date   : 2021-09-27 17:08 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.science.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.science.org)
        
       | 8bitsrule wrote:
       | Talk about important work in 'founding':
       | 
       |  _The Etruscans laid the first underground sewers in the city of
       | Rome around 500 BC. These cavernous tunnels below the city 's
       | streets were built of finely carved stones, and the Romans were
       | happy to utilize them when they took over the city._
       | 
       | [https://phys.org/news/2015-11-toilets-sewers-ancient-roman-s...]
        
       | Lucasoato wrote:
       | History is written by the victor; it's definitely curious that
       | among the famous seven kings of Rome the last three have Etruscan
       | origin.
        
         | OneTimePetes wrote:
         | Its better to be a mad emperor, then to be a unknown emperor..
         | ;)
        
           | kragen wrote:
           | Not the emperors, the kings. Before the Republic, not after
           | it.
        
       | avereveard wrote:
       | They likely dominated Rome at some point, but founded is quite a
       | strong claim given the marked cultural, linguistical and
       | artistical differences. There's no continuity at all to justify a
       | colony outgrow.
        
         | 0xbadcafebee wrote:
         | What I had heard was that the people of Rome lived around the
         | hills, and the Etruscans sort of did the work of building a
         | city and government, and the native Romans adopted their
         | culture, grew through conquest of neighboring native tribes,
         | and ultimately overthrew the Etruscans - but not before
         | eliminating the legacy of their former masters.
        
       | tomcooks wrote:
       | I was lucky enough to stealth camp near one of their necropolis,
       | a proper eerie experience
        
         | silvanocerza wrote:
         | Am curious, where? There are tons of them in the centre of
         | Italy.
        
       | disillusioned wrote:
       | Those darn Etruscans.
        
       | tomcam wrote:
       | Discovered Etruscan art during a random walk that led past a
       | small museum in Rome. It is elegant, unique, and weirdly
       | anachronistic for its era; has a futuristic feel to me.
        
         | koevet wrote:
         | The National Etruscan Museum in Rome
         | (https://www.museoetru.it/) holds one of the largest
         | collections of Etruscan art. Do not miss if you happen to be in
         | Rome.
        
           | mapster wrote:
           | Seems there are collections all thru Italy. I've been to two
           | museums with impressive Etruscan collections just in Le
           | Marche alone (Ancona, Sasso Feratto)
        
             | jaclaz wrote:
             | You mean, I believe, Sassoferrato (which was actually
             | Sentinum in roman times).
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentinum
             | 
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sassoferrato
             | 
             | I think that all was found there comes not from Etruscan
             | settlements, but rather from the battlefield:
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Sentinum or from
             | the umbri and sanniti, or from the later romans, etruscans
             | were reknown and appreciated for their art, particularly
             | ceramics, even in those times.
             | 
             | Etruscans cities were in central western Italy, mainly
             | Tuscany, and Lazio with extensions to the north (Emilia
             | Romagna and Veneto) and to the south (Campania):
             | 
             | https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Etruschi#/media/File:Etruscan
             | _...
             | 
             | Disclaimer:
             | 
             | the founder of the museum of Sassoferrato:
             | 
             | https://www.sassoferratoturismo.it/museo-civico-
             | archeologico...
             | 
             | was my grandfather, and all I know about the matter comes
             | from family stories.
        
           | _1tan wrote:
           | Seconded - affordable and not crowded as well!
        
             | convFixb wrote:
             | Thirded - Like many of the less-touristy museums in Rome,
             | it's a museum for grown-ups. I think the average HN'er
             | would appreciate it :)
        
               | 0xbadcafebee wrote:
               | Fourthed - it's also a gorgeous museum, in that it's
               | covered with beautiful Etruscan frescoes, and the grounds
               | feel more ancient and down to earth without pandering.
               | And it's pretty hard to find Etruscan artifacts, so it's
               | a one-stop-shop.
        
             | notorandit wrote:
             | I think you would need a whole year of museum visiting just
             | to have a glimpse of all pre-Roman civilizations in Italy.
             | The Museo Sannitico in Campobasso (https://www.musei.molise
             | .beniculturali.it/musei?mid=208&nome...) is one among them.
             | 
             | Everyone forgets about the Samnites, who required Rome to
             | fight 70 years before getting rid of them!
        
               | spockz wrote:
               | In high school we did a two week tour of Italy. I can
               | really recommend it to everyone. My uncle has taken my
               | nieces for holidays all over Italy for 16 years to show
               | all the nice places and art.
        
       | gumby wrote:
       | I is funny how few words (more proper nouns though) survived into
       | (or were absorbed into) Latin. One of my favorite Latin words,
       | Uxor, is an Etruscan loan word.
       | 
       | I have always loved it for its alien sound, and then later for
       | its meaning.
        
       | danjac wrote:
       | Some Etruscan words may have found their way into very modern
       | English:
       | 
       | - antenna
       | 
       | - satellite
       | 
       | - people/person
       | 
       | - ceremony
       | 
       | - serve
        
         | orangepanda wrote:
         | Also: mantissa
         | 
         | Can blame the Etruscans for IEEE 754
        
       | riffraff wrote:
       | My favourite part of the Etruscan language legacy is the letter
       | "C" ("K" sound).
       | 
       | It was originally a gamma ("G" sound), but the Etruscan language
       | did not need it and they just used it as K.
       | 
       | Then the Romans adopted the Etruscan alphabet, but they _did_
       | have both K and G sounds and so had to invent a new letter, even
       | tho the original greek alphabet (and all its predecessors)
       | already had it to begin with :)
        
         | signal11 wrote:
         | For anyone who likes this sort of thing, the initial few
         | episodes of the History of English podcast[1] is amazing. It
         | dives into the history right from Proto-Indo European and in
         | fact covers the Greek and Etruscan influences, and spends time
         | speaking about the people and their culture.
         | 
         | [1] https://historyofenglishpodcast.com/
        
         | folli wrote:
         | One, quite famous, Roman surname is Caesar. Unlike the modern
         | english pronunciation of his name, the pronunciation follows
         | what you have written: Kaesar.
         | 
         | In Germanic this morphed into "Kaiser", which is the german
         | word for "Emperor". I find it quite interesting how the status
         | and power of this one man was so widely recognized, that his
         | surname was already used during Roman times (and still is in
         | the German language) as a title for someone holding utmost
         | power. Originally, the name Caesar likely just meant "a hairy
         | person".
        
           | roywiggins wrote:
           | I think it might derive more from Augustus' use of the name-
           | he was the first Roman emperor, though Caesar did rule as
           | dictator for a little while.
        
             | quickthrowman wrote:
             | Augustus was Caesar's heir, and the name was part of his
             | inheritance.
        
               | kaesar14 wrote:
               | The same way Gaius Julius received it as an inheritance
               | from his forebears. OP is totally right that the name and
               | its power emanates from Octavian's prestige and
               | domination of the Roman world for near half a century.
        
               | roywiggins wrote:
               | Yeah, but it didn't become a _title_ until the Julio-
               | Claudians started using it to designate their heirs. When
               | Augustus took it on, it was just a powerful family name.
               | Once the Julio-Claudians were finished, it was a title.
               | 
               | It seems overwhelmingly likely that when later emperors
               | kept using it, they were referencing the dynasty that
               | Augustus founded, not Julius Caesar personally.
               | 
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesar_(title)#Sole_Roman_E
               | mpe...
        
           | mason55 wrote:
           | Also the source of czar and tsar!
        
       | notorandit wrote:
       | That doesn't sound to me as any news. Etruscans settled a lot of
       | colonies in the southern part of the peninsula, down to Pompeii
       | (which was founded by Etruscans and taken over by Samnites) and
       | Melfi. And they were ahead of all other local cultures by far,
       | especially in the metallurgic technologies and writing. They were
       | not a single kingdom but a group of city-kingdoms.
       | 
       | So I can think of Rome more like a colony that took over the
       | mother city-kingdom first, then the whole peninsula.
       | 
       | Moreover, the names of the first traditional kings of Rome are
       | Etruscans too.
        
         | Eric_WVGG wrote:
         | When I was a kid, there was a traveling museum thing about the
         | Etruscans. I will never forget the slogan: "Rome wasn't built
         | in a day. And it wasn't built by the Romans." Genius.
        
         | ramraj07 wrote:
         | A lot of times what's kinda obvious to experts can take a while
         | to be proven definitively. Like the presence of exo planets for
         | example.
        
       | fsckboy wrote:
       | Isn't it a bigger/more important mystery why proto-indo european
       | language was so successful at supplanting the local languages it
       | intermixed with? Rather than why the Etruscans kept speaking
       | their own language.
       | 
       | I'm really curious if there were positive "network effects" of
       | increasingly large populations of neighbors speaking compatible
       | languages (even if they formed a gradient as the Romance
       | languages did from Rome to Portugal and northern France)
       | Otherwise, it would make more sense for a successful prosperous
       | culture to keep their own language and it would not be surprising
       | at all.
        
         | est31 wrote:
         | The romance languages formed due to the legacy of the Roman
         | empire, so their success is largely due to the Roman success.
         | People say that the roman empire ended, and while indeed Rome
         | lost its central role in many ways, the roman empire's legacy
         | is still felt. Before the Romans though, there have been the
         | greeks as well as the hittites, both speaking indo european
         | languages. Romans pretty much copied a lot of greek culture as
         | well as their strategy of building trading outposts everywhere.
        
           | ithkuil wrote:
           | I think a similar argument can be made for the legacy of the
           | indo europeans. You just have to go a bit further back,
           | before greek and hittite and celt and iranian/aryan and vedic
           | cultures where a distinct thing, there was one single culture
           | speaking a single language: the proto indo european people
           | and culture. They had a lot of success (horse drawn carts
           | with wheels, bronze working). They slowly spread east and
           | west and slowly diverged for several millenia until we reach
           | the time frame you were talking about. Those descendent
           | cultures didn't branch and stay isolated forever after; as
           | you correctly point out, they did influence one another again
           | and again in successive waves.
           | 
           | The original question in this thread was: why was PIE culture
           | so successful that it supplanted almost all existing PRE-
           | indo-eurpean languages. Vascon and Etruscan survived (and
           | possibly others), the former evolving into modern Basque, and
           | Etruscan slowly dying out (very likely by the end of first
           | century AD there were no more etruscan speakers)
        
             | danjac wrote:
             | > Vascon and Etruscan survived (and possibly others)
             | 
             | How about Finno-Ugric? While the Hungarians only arrived
             | about 1000 years ago, the ancestors of the Finns, Sami and
             | related groups have lived in North-East Europe possibly
             | since the last Ice Age (although this is much disputed, and
             | it could be they adopted Proto-Finnic from some later
             | migration).
        
               | fogihujy wrote:
               | It depends on how you look at things. The Nordic Bronze
               | age spread around the entire Baltic as well, and genetic
               | markers associated with Finnic cultures appeared much
               | later, and in areas further north and east.
               | 
               | However, as the article mentions, it's unwise to assume
               | there is a 100% correlation between genetic markers and
               | culture/language. The Baltic Sea region has been a trade
               | hub since before the the first indo-european migrations
               | into the area, and some genetic mixing must have been
               | unavoidable.
        
               | Tagbert wrote:
               | You're comment about not assuming a correlation of
               | language and genetics is spot on for this topic. In the
               | linked article (or maybe it was another article on this
               | topic) they mention that genetic research shows that
               | Etruscans shared much of the same step-derived ancestry
               | as the Latin speaking Italians. It appears that, when
               | then step invaders came in, at least one group of them
               | picked up a local non-IE language even while their
               | genetics overcame the original speakers.
        
             | dr_dshiv wrote:
             | The steppe people evolved to raid and invade agricultural
             | communities; and those communities evolved to grow larger
             | to fend off the raids.
             | 
             | "pressure from the steppe selected for the unification and
             | scaling-up of agricultural societies into larger groups to
             | more effectively counteract these incursions. This in turn
             | would select for greater size in pastoralist communities,
             | and also other neighbouring agricultural groups who were
             | now relatively smaller and at a competitive disadvantage
             | with their neighbours. This effect would be amplified by
             | the diffusion of such military technology from the steppe"
             | 
             | From this awesome modeling paper
             | https://www.nature.com/articles/s41599-020-0516-2
        
           | morpheos137 wrote:
           | This not true. Indo-European diffusion in Europe preceeded
           | Roman influence by at least a half to a full milenium. For
           | example in 500 BC the Celts, the Germans and the Scythians
           | were all speaking indo european tongues while rome was a
           | relatively small republic or kingdom in italy. The italic
           | peoples surrouding the latins all spoke indo european
           | languages except for the etruscans.
        
         | sayonaraman wrote:
         | May be thousands of years before Genghis Khan the hords of
         | steppe people conquered the territory of modern Italy in the
         | same way mongols conquered most of Europe and Asia much later.
         | 
         | The fact Etruscans preserved their language could be either
         | because they fought really well or may be had some diplomatic
         | relations and mutual trade with the "migrants", or both.
         | 
         | It's funny we have the names of say Alexander the Great or
         | Genghis but leaders of those long gone civilizations before
         | them are completely unknown. May be they intermarried and the
         | steppe people' benevolent leader allowed some of the conquered
         | tribes to keep their language, who knows.
        
           | ithkuil wrote:
           | History is a very interesting topic and there are a lot of
           | great sources to study; books but also very good youtube
           | channels nowadays. There are a lot of things that we don't
           | know, but there is also a lot we do know; I'd recommend to
           | anybody who is interested to read more about the actual
           | history.
           | 
           | There are so many interesting details that can give more
           | depth to the struggle of human existence; migration,
           | ingenuity, cooperation, dominance, trade, war, culture,
           | religion.
           | 
           | Reducing everything to a couple of famous names is an
           | unfortunate oversimplification that glosses over much more
           | interesting aspects I wholeheartedly recommend to research.
        
         | Bayart wrote:
         | It's usually explained away by technological superiority,
         | namely the mastery of horse husbandry and cart-making. But
         | social structures geared towards war and conquest might have
         | played a role too.
        
       | kragen wrote:
       | An interesting thing the article somehow doesn't mention is that
       | the Roman alphabet in which I'm more or less typing this (IN
       | VVHICH I'M MORE OR LESS TYPING THIS) descends from the very
       | scarce Etruscan letters, which descend from Greek. This is why
       | the Roman alphabet revives letters like digamma and qoppa that
       | had been obsolete in Greek for centuries.
        
         | 1cvmask wrote:
         | "The Latin alphabet evolved from the visually similar Etruscan
         | alphabet, which evolved from the Cumaean Greek version of the
         | Greek alphabet, which was itself descended from the Phoenician
         | alphabet, which in turn derived from Egyptian hieroglyphics."
         | 
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_alphabet
        
           | seanw444 wrote:
           | I'm disappointed the list ends there.
        
             | kragen wrote:
             | The Egyptian hieroglyphics might be derived from cuneiform,
             | but the more popular hypothesis is that they were invented
             | by someone who didn't know how to read or write.
        
               | ChainOfFools wrote:
               | one amateur scribe was responsible for such an enormously
               | consequential bottleneck event?
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-09-28 23:02 UTC)