
Originally Posted by
Johane Derite
I will explain why its useful in my opinion. I posted it because it was rich with info from others, not just his own theory that he supports, which I am not supporting personally. I only posted some quotes from the paper, the link is there to read in entirety, its only a couple of pages, not much.
Here is what stood out for me:
The lemnos language does pose a challenge. If the dna results which we only have rumours and a PCA of until now are accurate, then theoretically Lemnos must be tested also and should show up as being Umrbian like autosomally, or at least shifted that way.
Another challenge is that he claims that Etruscans used ("according to Ingrid Pohl in her publication of the Iron Age cemetery of Caere, Pohl 1972") a different inhumation and cremation method to Villanovans:
"One of the most outstanding features of this Etruscan culture is formed by the chamber tomb under tumulus for multiple burials. The burial rites may consist of inhumation or a special form of cremation, according to which the remains of the pyre are collected in a gold or silver container which, wrapped in a purple linen cloth, is placed in a loculus of the grave. The closest parallels for such �lite-cremations are found in Anatolian style chamber tombs under tumulus at Salamis on Cyprus.
The rite in question is meticulously described by Homeros in connection with the burial of Patroklos, for which reason one often speaks of a Homeric burial. As far as mainland Greece is concerned, similar �lite-cremations are attested for the hero of Lefkandi and the burials at the west gate of Eretria. The element which is missing here, however, is the characteristic chamber tomb under tumulus (the hero of Lefkandi is discovered in an apsidal building secondarily used as a grave and covered by a tumulus) Chamber tombs under tumulus for multiple burials are a typical Mycenaean feature.
During the Late Bronze Age this type of burial is disseminated by Mycenaean colonists from mainland Greece to western Asia Minor, where it is subsequently taken over by the indigenous population groups like the Carians, Lycians, Lydians, and ultimately the Phrygians. The earliest indigenous examples are pseudo-cupolas in Caria, dated to the period of c. 1000 to 800 BC.
These graves are characterized by a rectangular groundplan and aconcentrically vaulted roof. The problem of the dome resting on a square issolved by the so-called pendentive. This very same construction is typical ofchamber tombs in Populonia during the 7th century BC. Similarly, in Lydia a chambertomb has been found with a roof vaulting lenghtwise in the same way as forexample the famous Regolini-Galassi tomb at Caere, dating to the 7th century BC.
Furthermore, Mysia has produced a chamber tomb which is entirelyhewn out of the soft tufa with mock roof beams in place as if it were a wooden construction. The same technique is so common for Etruria that if the photos of the Mysian example would have had no caption one could easily bemistaken to be dealing with an Etruscan grave.Unfortunately, the Anatolian examples in the last mentioned two cases wereso thoroughly robbed that they cannot be properly dated.
Next, it deserves ourattention that Lycia from the 6th century BC onwards is typified by fa�adegraves hewn out of the natural rock, which bring to mind the fa�ade graveshewn out of the natural rock of Norchia and its immediate surroundings towhich a similar date is assigned as the Lycian counterparts. Like the Mysian tomb mentioned above, the fa�ade graves imitate wooden constructions. Hence, it is interesting to note that actual woodenconstructions have been dug up in Phrygia. Here large wooden boxes datingto the late 8th and early 7th century BC serve as a replacement of the stonebuilt chamber tomb in a similar manner as in Vetulonia during the 7th century BC. Finally, mention should be made of a Lycian chamber tomb from the5th century BC with paintings which bear a strong resemblance to theEtruscan ones in Tarquinia � be it that the Lycian paintings, in contrast to theirEtruscan counterparts, show Persian motifs.
In summary, on the basis of the preceding survey of relations in funeral architecture one gains the impression that Etruria was in close contact with variousregions of western Anatolia during the Early Orientalizing period andbeyond . Possibly, a crucial role was played by Mysia, the Aeolian coast, andthe offshore islands like Lesbos, because here the typical local pottery, justlike in Etruria from the 7th century BC onwards, consists of bucchero."
This is significant, because if these types of burials are different to Villanovan types, then they need to be explained, were there Mycaneans in umbria? Otherwise, if house urns are etruscan, were there etruscans in north germany?
The Italo-Celtic-Germanic affinities fit more neatly for the shared toponyms and house urn material culture, whereas its a bit more difficult the other way around.
One thing this author, and most authors are probably not aware of is that the "Patroclus" types of burials are also in Albania according to Hammond: