Lauchum Tyeires zichuche:
>Except that it is difficult to think that way..when Strabo and others layer
>Oscan/Tyrrhenian/Pelasgian with the latter coming from
>Anatolia ..in time AND dominance..inside Greece. ( Anatolia is also
>where Arch. [...]
I'm trying to keep logical right now since I'm feeling undue stress
from a radio transmission about a woman who had called her poor
husband from one of the hijacked planes as it was flying towards
the World Trade Centre... I could cry right now.
Back to the subject:
The question is, "In what context does Strabo mention these layers?"
Is Strabo refering to a remote time in prehistory? Or more recent?
I'm slowly formulating instinctively the following scenario:
Around 5000 BCE Tyrrhenian became dominant as a language group
in the Eastern Mediterranean. By 3500, the language group started
to split apart and its dominance waned into Pelasgian and Tyrrhenian
branches. The Pelasgians started out in Mainland Greece but only
later (post 3000 BCE) headed out into open water to Anatolia, to
the islands, to Palestine, yadayada.
I don't think that it's hard to believe a language group surviving
thousands of years on the wane when we consider Basque and Burushaski
doing just the same thing for much longer periods.
Itam an zichuche:
>(Yes Glen, I think Lemnian, Etruscan and Reatic are Pelasgian.
A new thought. What if Pelasgians came from Greece post 3000 BCE,
settling in Anatolia with the Tyrrhenians, whereby splitting up by
1500-1000 BCE to become Etruscan, Rhaetic and Lemnian. Is this
your thinking? I think somebody mentioned this before... I'm a
little slow but I'm coming around.
-------------------------------------------------
gLeNny gEe
...wEbDeVEr gOne bEsErK!
home:
http://glen_gordon.tripod.com
email:
glengordon01@...
-------------------------------------------------
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp