>I see that you translate Lasana as "Tyrrhenians". Might it not be
I don't think so. I relate the term to Etruscan /ras'na/ but we
know the latter refers to the Etruscans specifically. The normal
word for "people" in Etruscan is /metHlum/.
There's a Rhaetic inscription that reads as follows:
paniun las'anu-ale shupi-ku perunies scHaispala
I take it that /las'anu/ means "Rhaetic" and is equivalent to
/ras'na/ and EteoCypriot /lasana/. These cognates would be
related to an earlier EtruscoCypriot form *Lasena which would
refer to _all_ Tyrrhenian peoples as a single people. This is
why, I think, the ECyp text says specifically "Muklai Lasana"
or "Tyrrhenians in _Amathous_". The name /Lasana/ itself
would have been unspecific as to which Tyrrhenian peoples
(Etruscan, Rhaetic, Camunic, Lemnian, EteoCypriot or Minoan)
were being referred to.
I can only suspect that the expected correlating Minoan
form would be *Turasena. Note an Egyptian name for a
certain sea people that invaded in 1210 BCE under the
reign of Merneptah. Note also the Greek name /tyrrhenoi/.
>Perhaps in Eteocypriot one could not say that without implying that it was
>the actual buildings, etc. which were
But as I said, the ECyp text effectively means the same
thing: "In their city, the Tyrrhenians in Amathous honour
Ariston...". Perhaps it's more a matter of artistic license in
>If so ,and if Lasana truly was cognate with Rasna, it would hardly be the
>only case where an ethnic self-
>designation was directly derived from a term meaning
Sure, but I see no justification for this here because as
I've said the word for people in Etruscan is /metHlum/.
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online