Mr. Knysh
you are a strange "historian"
if I understood well your job.
Your "proof" is that the hypothesis
that Etruscans might have come from somewhere
else
is true as of right now
because it might happen in the future to be proved
right.
I'm sorry
I don't believe in promises
I thought history was a serious science dealing
with facts.
Alleging an article in a newspaper doesn't sound
serious at all.
So far you have not answered my questions
:
The major problem for any theory that makes
Etruscans arrive from somewhere else is teleology.
People with a known capacity of moving somewhere
else : PIE, Vikings, English, Romans, Greeks. All these people settled in *many*
places : They did not move from place A to place B. They scattered from place A
to places B C D etc.
So the problem with the non-autochtonous theory is
at least four-fold :
- where from ?
- when did they move ?
- why is it we have no traces of Etruscans
somewhere else ?
- why is it Etruscans precisely chose
only Etruria,
when they had plenty of places to choose from
(Cf Phoenicians)
I am still waiting for something more that a fuzzy
article in NYT.
Arnaud