Contents
Etruscan civilization
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
RasnaRasenna
1200 BC – 100 BC
→
Capital Velzna- (Orvieto)
Language(s) Etruscan language
Religion Etruscan paganism
Political structure Confederation
Luchume
- Unknown Tyrrhenus
- Unknown Tarchon
Legislature Etruscan League
Historical era Ancient
- Villanovan 1200 BC
- Roman assimilation 100 BC
Etruscan civilization is the modern English name given to the culture and way of life of a people of ancient Italy and Corsica whom the ancient Romans called Etrusci or Tusci.[1] The Attic Greek word for them was Τυρρήνιοι (Tyrrhēnioi) from which Latin also drew the names Tyrrhēni (Etruscans), Tyrrhēnia (Etruria) and Tyrrhēnum mare (Tyrrhenian Sea).[2] The Etruscans themselves used the term Rasenna, which was syncopated to Rasna or Raśna.[3]
As distinguished by its own language, the civilization endured from an unknown prehistoric time prior to the founding of Rome until its complete assimilation to Italic Rome in the Roman Republic. At its maximum extent during the foundation period of Rome and the Roman kingdom, it flourished in three confederacies of cities: of Etruria, of the Po valley with the eastern Alps, and of Latium and Campania.[4] Rome was sited in Etruscan territory. There is considerable evidence that early Rome was dominated by Etruscans until the Romans sacked Veii in 396 BC.
Culture that is identifiably and certainly Etruscan developed in Italy after about 800 BC approximately over the range of the preceding Iron Age Villanovan culture. The latter gave way in the seventh century to a culture that was influenced by Greek traders and Greek neighbors in Magna Graecia, the Hellenic civilization of southern Italy.
After 500 BC the political destiny of Italy passed out of Etruscan hands, as they had overrun Italy rather than securing it with a firm hold and assimilating the subject populations.[5]
Language
Knowledge of the Etruscan language is still far from complete. The Etruscans are believed to have spoken a non-Indo-European language; the majority consensus is that Etruscan is related only to other members of what is called the Tyrsenian language family, which in itself is an isolate family, that is, unrelated directly to other known language groups. Since Rix (1998) it is widely accepted that the Tyrsenian family groups Rhaetic and Lemnian are related to Etruscan.
Etymology
No etymology exists for Rasna.
The etymology of Tusci is based on a beneficiary phrase in the third Iguvine tablet, which is a major source for the Umbrian language.[6] The phrase is turskum ... nomen, "the Tuscan name", from which a root *Tursci can be reconstructed.[7] A metathesis and a word-initial epenthesis produce E-trus-ci.[8] A common hypothesis is that *Turs- along with Latin turris, "tower", come from Greek τύρσις, "tower."[9]. The Tusci were therefore the "people who build towers"[9] or "the tower builders."[10] This venerable etymology is at least as old as Dionysius of Halicarnassus, who said "And there is no reason why the Greeks should not have called them by this name, both from their living in towers and from the name of one of their rulers."[11]
The Bonfantes (Bonfante 2002) speculate that Etruscan houses seemed like towers to the simple Latins. It is true that the Etruscans preferred to build hill towns on high precipices enhanced by walls. On the other hand if the Tyrrhenian name came from an incursion of sea peoples or later migrants (see below) then it might well be related to the name of Troy, the city of towers in that case.
Origins
The origins of the Etruscans are lost in prehistory. Several hypotheses exist, some of which are listed below. They are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
Debate over origins was revived in the 17th century. Whether ancient or modern, theorists proceed mainly by looking for pattern matches between cultures; that is, given sets of cultural elements, {a, b, ...} of cultures {A, B, ...}, theorists look for groups of common elements and then hypothesize a connection between the corresponding cultures. The elements might be from any cultural aspects at all, from speech sounds to pot marks.
No complete but many partial matches have been found.
Ethnic formation hypothesis
In his own history of the Etruscan debate, Massimo Pallottino, the dominant Etruscologist of his times, distinguished between "provenance" and "ethnic formation."[12] Theories of the former seek an origin. He divided those into "oriental", "northern" and "autochthonous."
Formulating a different point of view on the same evidence, Pallottino says:[13]
... we must consider the concept 'Etruscan' as ... attached to ... a nation that flourished in Etruria between the eighth and first centuries BC .... We may discuss the provenance of each of these elements but a more appropriate concept ... would be that of formation ... the formative process of the nation can only have taken place on the territories of the Etruscans proper; and we are able to witness the final stages of this process.
Autochthonous hypothesis
Dionysius of Halicarnassus asserted:[11]
Indeed, those probably come nearest to the truth who declare that the nation migrated from nowhere signal, but was native to the country, since it is found to be a very ancient nation and to agree with no other either in its language or in its manner of living.
With this passage Dionysius launched the autochthonous theory, that the core element of the Etruscans, who spoke the Etruscan language, were of "the earth itself"; that is, on location for so long that they appeared to be the original or native inhabitants. They are therefore the owners of the Villanovan culture.[14]
Picking up this theme, the Bonfantes (2002) state:[15]
... the history of the Etruscan people extends ... from c. 1200 to c. 100 BC. Many sites of the chief Etruscan cities of historical times were continuously occupied from the Iron Age 'Villanovan period on. Much confusion would have been avoided if archaeologists had used the name 'Proto-Etruscan' .... For in fact the people ... did not appear suddenly. Nor did they suddenly start to speak Etruscan.
An additional elaboration conjectures that the Etruscans were[16]
... an ethnic island of very ancient peoples isolated by the flood of Indo-European speakers.
Lydian immigration hypothesis
Herodotus[17] records the legend that the Etruscans came from Lydia in Asia Minor, modern Turkey:
This is their story: [...] their king divided the people into two groups, and made them draw lots, so that the one group should remain and the other leave the country; he himself was to be the head of those who drew the lot to remain there, and his son, whose name was Tyrrhenus, of those who departed. [...] they came to the Ombrici, where they founded cities and have lived ever since. They no longer called themselves Lydians, but Tyrrhenians, after the name of the king's son who had led them there.
In reply, Dionysius of Halicarnassus, who read Herodotus, states:[11]
For this reason, therefore, I am persuaded that the Pelasgians are a different people from the Tyrrhenians. And I do not believe, either, that the Tyrrhenians were a colony of the Lydians; for they do not use the same language as the latter, nor can it be alleged that, though they no longer speak a similar tongue, they still retain some other indications of their mother country. For they neither worship the same gods as the Lydians nor make use of similar laws or institutions, but in these very respects they differ more from the Lydians than from the Pelasgians.
Sea peoples hypothesis
The Etruscans or Tyrrhenians may have been one of the sea peoples of the 13th-14th century BC.
Genetic evidence
A team of geneticists from Italy and Spain undertook the first genetic studies of the ancient Etruscans, based on mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) from 80 bone samples taken from tombs dating from the seventh century to the third century BC in Etruria.[18] This study found that they were more related to each other than to the general population of modern Italy. Recent studies suggested a Near East origin. [19]
An earlier study estimated that the pool contained 150,000 to 200,000 women.[20] Dividing these numbers by the 36 cities in the three Etruscan leagues obtains an average of 4,167 to 6,944 women per community. Selecting an arbitrary family size of four gives an approximate Etruscan population of 600,000 to 800,000 persons in about 36 communities of an average between 16,668 and 27,776 persons each. These populations are sufficiently dense and sufficiently urban to have accomplished everything the Etruscans were supposed to have accomplished.