[tied] Re: Glen's Strange Tyrrhenian

Anne,

You have to excuse Glen's enthusiasm. Tyrrhenian is actually the
Hellenic (Ionian)-Lydic name for the Etruscans of central Italy.
However, through a Lydian foundation myth with a legendary figure
called Tyrrhenus and a people called Tyrrhenian, the Etruscans are
connected to a western Anatolian district called Tyras. Records from
the Egyptian 19th and 20th dynasties indicate there is a strong
historical basis for this myth. They mention a group called the
Tyrsha as among the Sea Peoples; a mass migration from the Aegean,
western Anatolia, Crete, and Libya.

In one way or another, this heavily armed and highly mobile mob was
credited with the total destruction of the palace dynasties and
cultures of Anatolia, Cyprus, Syria, and Palestine. Its apparent
that as part of the Sea Peoples one element of the Tarusa-Tyrsha-
Tyrrhenians fanned east and south to end up in Palestine, while
another element sailed west, settling in Umbria in central Italy.
Based on Hittite archival military records western Anatolia supported
a population of about two million by the Late Bronze Age. Thus, with
the addition of populations from Greece, the Agaen, and Crete the Sea
Peoples migration may have involved at least half a million people.
Even a quarter of this total would have been sufficient to
significantly alter the culture, demographics, and linguistics of
central Italy.

Because of the similarities between Etruscan and Lemnian it is
probable that; the Tyrrhenians settled Lemnos around the same time
they migrated to Italy; the Tyrrhenians maintained close demographic
and cultural interaction with the Tyras District; or both. There may
have been an additional large Tyrrhenian settlement established in
the southern Ukraine at Tyras, but that's another tread. The
relationship of the Alpine Rhaetic to Etruscan is a little dicey.
There is a relationship, however it is unclear if this stems from the
same base as Etruscan or if it is more ancient and was historically
reinforced due to Etruscan military and administrative expansion into
the Po Basin.

Regardless, the commonality all of these languages have is Pelasgian
and not Tyrrhenian-Etruscan.

Additionally, there is not chronological point of reference beyond
the very end of the 2st millennium BC. Providing a calendarical
placement of 7000 BC for the commonality of a so-called Tyrrhenian
language and 4500-1500 BC for the divergence of Etrusco-Lemnian is
simply not productive. The same can be said for the proposed 4000 BC
date for the commonality of PIE,.as the best that it can be
correlated is the beginning of the Middle Bronze Age.



Awaiting the coming storm, hope this helps


JS Crary