Niebuhr's lectures on Roman history, Vol. 1 (of 3)Niebuhr, Barthold Georg
History
Niebuhr's lectures on Roman history, Vol. 1 (of 3)
Niebuhr, Barthold Georg
Rome -- History
Dionysius had this information, that the Etruscans considered
themselves as an indigenous people, which descended from no other,
and, knowing nothing of the name of Tyrrhenians and Etruscans, called
themselves Rasena.[63] Of the traditions of the Greeks they knew
nothing. Yet the latter had two distinct traditions concerning the
Tyrrhenians, which they referred to the Etruscans; the one, that of
Hellanicus, that the Pelasgians from Thessaly had settled at the mouth
of the Po, at Spina, from whence they had crossed over the mountains to
Etruria; the second, that of Herodotus, according to which the Lydians
at the time of Atys, were visited by a famine, so that part of the
people under Tyrrhenus were obliged to emigrate to Italy. Dionysius
controverts the latter statement in that good style of criticism which
we sometimes find in him, on the ground that neither the language
nor the religion of the Etruscans bore any resemblance to those of
the Lydians; and that neither the Etruscans, nor the Lydian writer
Xanthus,--whose work, as O. Müller shows, was unjustly suspected among
the Greeks of not being genuine,--know any thing about it. Dionysius
in this judged rightly, because he did not work from books, but from
immediate observation. With the other tradition he deals differently:
he does not altogether drop it; but he refers it, not to the Etruscans,
but to the aborigines. The Italian antiquaries, on the contrary, stuck
to the Lydian tradition; or they also referred the emigration of the
Pelasgians from Thessaly to the Etruscans, and said, in spite of all
the assertions of Herodotus, that the inhabitants of Cortona (Croton)
were not at all different from the people of the neighbourhood.
And here I will now set forth the simple results of my researches
concerning the Etruscans. I have (in the new edition of the first
volume of my Roman history) shown that the name of Tyrrhenians was
transferred by the Greeks to the Etruscans, as we use that of Britons
when speaking of the English, or that of Mexicans and Peruvians, of
the Spaniards in America; because those nations dwelt originally in
these countries, whilst a newly immigrating people founded quite a new
order of things, and that so completely that we no more recognise any
traces of an earlier condition, than if the former had never existed.
The Tyrrhenians were quite a different people; yet they inhabited the
shores of Etruria, as well as the whole coast to the south, as far as
Œnotria proper, i. e. Calabria and Basilicata. These Tyrrhenians were
Pelasgians, as well as those of the Peloponnesus and Thessaly: and
when Sophocles speaks of Τυῤῥηνοὶ πελασγοί in Argos; when in Æschylus
king Pelasgus, son of Palæchthon, rules in Argos; when Tyrrhenians,
according to Thucydides, reside near Athos, and in Lemnos, and,
according to Herodotus, in Attica near the Hymettus, these are all
branches of one and the same stock. In Asia Minor we must fill up the
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account