Re: Greater Pelasgia

Rex wrote

> Not clear where you are going here..I don't think anyone would deny

Semitic

> residual influences..or new ones from sea trade...IF we address an

Anatolian

> origin of Etruscan. The question is how does this phenomenom of:

(little

> bitty Lemnian with Anatolian influence) "laid over a bed of nearly

erased

> Semitic" rise to dominate a period in Italy, without some degree of

Aegean

> (Anatolian+Greek+Islands) commonality and support? If that was

there, then

> "Etrusco-Lemnian" is a mislabel, and Indo-Etruscan is a late Italy

only

> sub-variant of an Aegean wide IE (or proto or pre IE) linguistic

layer. If

> we have an Aegean wide sea trade culture extending well into the

med; how

> do we retain a near isolate at the center of this activity (Lemnos),

and how

> does it dominate a wider culture in Italy?

I wonder about "Semitic residual influences". Especially in Anatolia.
The resideual influence in Anatolia was Khattic (no Semitic traces
there), Kaska (no evidence of what they spoke) and perhaps
Lemno-Eutruscan. Not much evidence of Semitic trade into the region
either until Phoenician times (after 1,000 BCE). Prior to that most
trade was carried by Cretian or Mycenaean intermediaries. Even Greek
myth says the Kadmians carried Phoenician writing (i.e. after 1,000
BCE).

Regards

John