romus romulus, ancient etruscans and their relationship with turks

i found a very interesting information about the myth of romus romulus and etruscans who are believed to found the roman city .ancient turks believed that they descended from a she wolf and this is not the only one similarity between turks and etruscans .

.......................


To better compare the Etruscan gene pool with those of contemporary Italy, we treated these populations as hybrids among four potential parental populations, from the four corners of the area considered in this study (table 2). The likely contributions of each parental population, or admixture coefficients, are similar for the three modern Italian populations, but Etruscans differ in two aspects: they show closer relationships both to North Africans and to Turks than any contemporary population. In particular, the Turkish component in their gene pool appears three times as large as in the other populations. These admixture estimates are not to be taken at their face value, for numerous assumptions underlie their estimation. Here they only serve to show that, with respect to modern Italian gene pools, the Etruscan one contains an excess of haplotypes suggesting evolutionary ties with the populations of the southern and eastern Mediterranean shores.







mtDNA of ancient Etruscans - History Forum ~ All Empires - Page 1

There is another story on the founding of Rome by refugees from Troy, so more conenction to Turkey for you

Founding of Rome - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quag said:

There is another story on the founding of Rome by refugees from Troy, so more conenction to Turkey for you

Founding of Rome - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Click to expand...

thx quag ,i have always been interested in history and mythology ,i wonder everything about ancient people and their culture .i wish i had a time machine to visit them

maybe you know the west usually finds turks barbarian and claim we didnt produce anything useful for modern world .and i know that the history written from the western perspective will ignore all these informations .

it is also said that there are lots of scientific informations and researches which point sumerian culture and language has a lot of similarities with turks.

it is not important to me ,but i think it is important to the western civilization .thats why they always ignore such studies:2razz:

Medusa said:

thx quag ,i have always been interested in history and mythology ,i wonder everything about ancient people and their culture .i wish i had a time machine to visit them

maybe you know the west usually finds turks barbarian and claim we didnt produce anything useful for modern world .and i know that the history written from the western perspective will ignore all these informations .

it is also said that there are lots of scientific informations and researches which point sumerian culture and language has a lot of similarities with turks.

it is not important to me ,but i think it is important to the western civilization .thats why they always ignore such studies:2razz:

Click to expand...

I agree, western histories tend to ignore or paint turkey and the whole middle east/far east in a poor light, come to think of it Africa/South America and North America (pre colonization) as well.
I think the antiturkey bias dates back to the greek/persian wars.
Still thanx for postign the bit about Romulus and Remus

Yes, it was always known/suspected that the Etruscans were probably founded as a refugee community, as so much of their culture was different & seperated from the other tribes in the area & genetics & other evidence has now confirmed that.

The Turks are thought to have originated in what are now Siberia and Mongolia, and
did not arrive in force in the ME until well into the Christian era, and perhaps well into
the Islamic era as well.

Without looking it up I do not think Turkish migrants set foot in what is now Turkey
until possibly 1000 years after the Etruscans had died out as a separate ethnic group
ca. 200BC.

The DNA evidence sounds interesting, but I cannot get the links to work either.

Has anyone (re)analyzed the Etruscan language from the point of view that it might
belong to the Turkish language family?

This is not an area I am familar with but didn't the two men come from Greece? I thought they had escaped there for some reason and made their way to Italy where they founded Rome?

The kelt race was believed to have started in the area around the Black Sea and then spread both west and east. The Gallatians in the Bible may have been Kelts.

USViking said:

The Turks are thought to have originated in what are now Siberia and Mongolia, and
did not arrive in force in the ME until well into the Christian era, and perhaps well into
the Islamic era as well.

Without looking it up I do not think Turkish migrants set foot in what is now Turkey
until possibly 1000 years after the Etruscans had died out as a separate ethnic group
ca. 200BC.

The DNA evidence sounds interesting, but I cannot get the links to work either.

Has anyone (re)analyzed the Etruscan language from the point of view that it might
belong to the Turkish language family?

Click to expand...

yes ,there are lots of researches made in turkish but west always ignores. as i said before they really fear that history will have to be written again..

wolfman24 said:

This is not an area I am familar with but didn't the two men come from Greece? I thought they had escaped there for some reason and made their way to Italy where they founded Rome?

Click to expand...

i cant know but mythology, linguistic and dna tests claim the opposite of this.

and let me say ancient turks were nomads and there were lots of turkish tribes that had settled in anatolia hundreds of years ago by moving from asia when turks gained the sovereignty of this region in 1071 .thats why those tribes helped their relatives seljuks and took their side during malazgirt war which opened the doors of anatolia to the turkish administration.

wolfman24 said:

The kelt race was believed to have started in the area around the Black Sea and then spread both west and east. The Gallatians in the Bible may have been Kelts.

Click to expand...

teh people living in central anatolia look like kelts .they are mostly blonde

Medusa said:

teh people living in central anatolia look like kelts .they are mostly blonde

Click to expand...

They are descended from Celts. They invaded in the 200's BCE and made a good living as mercenaries, until subdued by the Romans 100 years later in the Gallatian war.

As for the angle on Etruscan DNA being related to the people of Izmir, that is certainly interesting, but not necessarily because of any Turkish angle.
There are multiple Roman origin myths, but we have a pretty good idea, how it was formed. It was a mongrel city, consisting of people from all over Central Italy, Etruscans and Sabines included. People migrated there because it was situated at the only crossing point on the Tiber, which made it a natural centre for trade and growth, so people from all over ventured there.

Aeneas was from Troy, which lay in the vicinity of Izmir, and it has often been suggested that the Troy myth actually referred to the Etruscans, from which the Romans partially regarded themselves as being descended.

Usual cunfusions between current names and actual populations. Weren't the Etruscans supposed to be of Lydian origin? The descendants of all the peoples of Asia Minor are now called 'Turks', I suppose, but to call the Etruscans anything so anachronistic is silly.

HK.227 said:

They are descended from Celts. They invaded in the 200's BCE and made a good living as mercenaries, until subdued by the Romans 100 years later in the Gallatian war.

As for the angle on Etruscan DNA being related to the people of Izmir, that is certainly interesting, but not necessarily because of any Turkish angle.
There are multiple Roman origin myths, but we have a pretty good idea, how it was formed. It was a mongrel city, consisting of people from all over Central Italy, Etruscans and Sabines included. People migrated there because it was situated at the only crossing point on the Tiber, which made it a natural centre for trade and growth, so people from all over ventured there.

Aeneas was from Troy, which lay in the vicinity of Izmir, and it has often been suggested that the Troy myth actually referred to the Etruscans, from which the Romans partially regarded themselves as being descended.

Click to expand...

i said it before ,westerner will never accept these important researches........

(post #9)

Medusa said:

yes ,there are lots of researches made in turkish but west always ignores. as i said before they really fear that history will have to be written again..

Click to expand...

Western scholarship would not ignore plausibly researched conclusions drawn
by non-Westerners, and you are bigoted to say they would.

The possibility that the Etruscans originated in what is now Turkey has been
considered from the start of Western historical writing, by Herodotus, ca. 470BCE.

Your next post indicates you do not have enough of a grasp of the history
to contribute anything intelligent to the discussion.



(post #10)

Medusa said:

i cant know but mythology, linguistic

Click to expand...

I would like to know much more about the linguistics. If there are no internet citations
in English, then provide Turkish, and maybe Google will be able to translate it.

Medusa said:

and dna tests claim the opposite of this.

and let me say ancient turks were nomads and there were lots of turkish tribes that had settled in anatolia hundreds of years ago by moving from asia when turks gained the sovereignty of this region in 1071 (emphasis added-USV).thats why those tribes helped their relatives seljuks and took their side during malazgirt war which opened the doors of anatolia to the turkish administration.

Click to expand...

1071 was much more than 1000 years, and possibly over 2000 years after the Etruscans
left their original homeland, wherever it was, and settled in Italy. Therefore, if the Turks
did not arrive in Anatolia until 1071 it is unlikely they are closely related to the Etruscans.
Rather, invading Turks may have intermarried with native Anatolians who were descendants
of common ancestors of the Etruscans.

Medusa said:

teh people living in central anatolia look like kelts .they are mostly blonde

Click to expand...

Kelts were not necessarily blonde, they had all types of hair color including red. The Germans and the northern Baltic tribes were mostly blonde. Kelt =/ Germanic

Medusa said:

i said it before ,westerner will never accept these important researches........

Click to expand...

They Turks conquered Izmir for a period in 1076, but got kicked out again shortly after. It wasn't until the 1300's they were able to take and hold it.
The Etruscans settled in Italy around 1200 BC, so the math is off by 2500 years.

Furthermore, in another thread you seemed to acknowledge that many modern Turks are actually genetically closer related to the various people's they conquered, than their Central Asian ancestors.
Izmir is a very old city, and I don't recall reading anything about it being ethnically cleansed by the Turks, so it should follow that the people there could be at least partially descended from the original inhabitants.
Finally, the last time I was in Izmir, you could catch the bus to the site of Ancient Troy, so the two sites are not all that far apart.

Which might indicate, that there could be a connection between the Aeneas myth and Izmir, given the DNA angle.
Whereas there is no indication that the ancient Turkomans had anything to do with the Etruscans, or the DNA evidence would have pointed to them rather than the Izmir'ites.

The wolf angle is interesting, but lots of ancient people have legends about the wolf. That hardly makes all of them Turks or Romans.