GrecoItalicIllyrian

Junior Member
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Ethnic group
Apulian
Can someone give me a brief description of every Italic tribe , in terms of who they they were Ethnically, Culturally, Linguistically etc

No need to use Haplogroups.

By Italic I mean all tribes inhabiting what is now Italy.
 
Last edited:
Well you got the Cisalpine Celts, Romans, Cathraginians, Greeks called the Griko people, Estruicans etc
 
In wat concerns western sicily's Elymians, it would appear that they where Trojans, fleeing from a Troy sacked predominantly by the Achaean variety of Greeks; these Trojans where led by their hero Acestes, they would have founded Segesta.
 
Sicily: 1. Elymians where Trojans 2. Sicani where the first people of Sicily; their genetic profile would have been typically Western European 3. The Siculi/Sicules where Greek colonizers that arrived en-masse in eastern Sicily ( they would have belonged to multiple tribes.) there where two main types of Greeks on Sicily; the Dorians and the Ionians. The Ionians controlled most of the northeastern coastline and eastern Sicilian coastline. They also controlled the tip of Calabria (The Reggio Calabria area). In Basilicata, they controlled the Siris/Heraclea area and a small little stretch of coast. The Ionians also colonized the Elea/Pixous coast region of southern Campania and the Cumae/Ischia/Capua/Napoli region of northern campania. The Ionians, thought to be the Javans of the bible, are in all probabilities, of anatolian descent. Biblically speaking, if they ARE Javan, then they're in the same racial line/category as Iran's Madai (Medes). Athens was originally founded by Ionians, most of the cities on the island of Euboea, such as Eretria and it's ancient rival Chalcis, where founded by Ionian Greeks. (Note that as a city name, Chalcis can also be traced to Syria, as can be the Oenotrians , and Eretria sounds oddly familiar to Etruria). The other Greeks on Sicily are Dorians, they covered the entire southern coastline of Sicily and a strip of land on the tip of apulia where the Iapygians would have earlier (before heavy Greek colonization) installed themselves. The Achaeans, held no territory on Sicily, but they had colonized the entire eastern coast of Calabria, they also founded Paestum in Campania and held small territory in Basilicata. Then I believe Ancona was founded by Syracusan Greeks, who where Doric, and then there's a whole slew of "other" tribes that are not pried to be of continental European origin; we KNOW the Etruscans came from Anatolia, the Oenotrians probably trace their origins here as well, Elymians where Trojans, Phoenicians colonized western Sicily as well, Iapygians came from Crete, The ancient "Oscans" are an odd bunch to figure out; where they a spill-off of Umbrian type tribes, as their linguistic family was Osco-Umbrian? Or was their mix with Greeks as well; a Latin-Hellenic culture? The Umbrians where probably from Denmark (Ambrones) or Germanic and the Sabines I believe descend from them as do in term the Samnites and Oscans. Or, are the Samnites the ancient Sannoi of Georgia in the Middle East? Are the Sabines similar to Enotrians in origin, or like the Celtic Umbrians. Everything north of Etruscan territory other than the Enetoi maybe is always of probably continental European origin, 95% of the time even Celtic.
 
So basically we know everything above Tuscany/Umbria is Celtic, but I remain unsure on the Sabines, Samnites, Oscans (Oscans are the Ausones) Aurunci, Piceni, I would like to know more about the origins of the tribes I just mentioned...The Opici (Oscans) was also a theme of western Turkey in the Classical Greek era I believe; I haven't seen evidence confirming these people's aren't of Greek/Anatolian origin.
 
And in what concerns the Greeks, I personally believe that the Ionians where an Anatolian branch, the Achaeans where linked to Aegyptus and the Dorians, who where not to be confused with the "Barbaroi" as they themselves where "Hellenic", where probably of continental European origin, having arrived from the north.
 
Ionians and Achaeans (Aeolians included) where "Barbaroi" with different origins; the Dorians where a Hellenic group. Their different mythical origins, when analysed, do coincide well with the genetic history of Greece. The Ionians slowly moved in over thousands of years, as seen in maps, from Anatolia across the Aegean islands and into Greece (Just as the similar Rhodanim move from southwestern Anatolia towards Rhodes and the Kittim moved from Anatolia to settle the island of Cyprus.) The Achaeans arrived from Egypt, as their eponym states (think along the lines of E3b Greeks) and the Dorians arrived via a location in more Northern Europe than where Greece is positioned.
 
In fact, according to the Yosippon, a medieval Rabbinic compilation, the Kittim (Cyprus) migrated to Campania in Italy and there built a city called "Posomanga". Descendants of Tubal on the other hand, migrated to Tuscany and brought about the "Sabino" people. Tubal, is a son of Japeth that lived in Caucasian Iberia, basically modern-day Georgia (Colchis/Iberia).....these Georgian people may even be behind the explanation of Iberia's non-indo-European speaking Iberian people's (Tartessians/Turdetanians), the Samnites may have derived from the Sabines as well). These Kittim that arrived in Italy via Cyprus where anciently associated with Hatti and/or Hittite continental Anatolian people's.)
 
It is clearly indicated in the bible that the Ionians (Javans) where brothers of all the sons of Japheth; Ashkenaz, Riphath, Gomer, Togarmah (father of Georgians/Armenians) Madai (Medes), Tubal (Georgians and father's of settlers of Tuscany to a limited genetic impact, I'm speaking historically), Meschech (father of Caucasus people's linked to Armenia) etc.
 
So the Sabines and Samnites, may not be similar to the Suebians and such European tribes; the Samnites may in fact be the Sannoi of Georgia and the Oscans may have been latins with a Hellenic substratum; or they may even have Anatolian origins as the Lucanians and Brutii and Enotrians and Morgetes probably did.
 
There are 2 opinions on the Siculi/Σικελοί

Philistos of Syracuse regarded the Siculi/Σικελοί as Ligurians
Antiochus of Syracuse regarded the Siculi/Σικελοί as Greeks (descendents of Oenotrians)

Thucydides
however records that the Siculi/Σικελοί arrived in Sicily three centuries before the arrival of the Greeks and the establishment of the first colony - Naxos 759 BC;
And Dionysius and Festus record how the Siculi/Σικελοί were expelled from the central Apennine region by the Umbrians;
 
There you go; another semi-mysterious tribe....The eastern half of Sicily though WAS heavily colonized by Greeks , with ancient Sicilian sites such as Tyndaris, Taormina, Giardini-Naxos and Heraclea Minoa for example; very ancient sites of Greek colonization on Sicily but these sites would date from the middle (intermediate) portion of greek history (the colonies on the coasts of Asia Minor came first).
 
The Chalcidians (who were Ionians) and other Euboeans and peleoponesians heavily colonized parts of Sicily as well as the Dorians. There is also Anatolian genes and Phoenician blood mixed at lower levels in there, not to mention typically European DNA and other possible pelasgic tribes I forgot to mention
 
Nice little picture showing how Ionians and similar Pelasgian people's spread from Turkey and across the Aegean towards Greece and the Mediterranean world beyond.
 
So certainly Ionian,Achaean,Dorian Greeks arrived to Italy along with Cretans (Iapygians), a Cypriot group arrived in Northern Campania and Tubal from Georgia in the Caucasus arrived in Tuscany; presumably the Etruscans. The Chonii and Oenotrians where probably of Greek and before that middle eastern influence. The Lucanians and their Calabrian Brutii and Morgetes offshoots where probably of Anatolian origin and same goes for the Oscans. The Samnites and Sabines where mythical tribes from the Georgia/Armenia region (Sannoi,Tubal). The Phoenicians settled western Sicily as well; this is all the Pelasgian element of Italy (I forgot to mention Enetoi, paphlagonian Turks)
 
One tool to get a sense of the diversity in Italy is to look at the languages spoken there during the iron age. Even if language does not always map to ethnic identity, it's still a useful tool. To name a few (I am taking this mostly from Mallory):


Ligurian (Ligures, IE, possibly Celtic)
Lepontic (IE, Celtic)
Etruscan (Tyrsenian, non-IE)
Raetic (also thought to be Tyrsenian and related to Etruscan)
Umbrian (Umbri, related to Oscan)
Oscan (Sabines, Aurunci, Sidicini, Ausones)
Massapic (Iapyges, Dauni, Peucetii; possibly related to Illyrian)
N. Picene (undeciphered)
S. Picene (probably IE)
Venetic (IE, centum language, classification debatable)
Latin (closely related to Faliscan)
Faliscan (Falisci, closely related to Latin)


What this suggests is two things:


1. The presence of a neolithic Tyrsenian substrate; of course how extensive or homogeneous this was remains unknown. There could have been multiple non-IE peoples on the peninsula long before the arrival of the first Indo-Europeans. It would be interesting to know what hg(s) correspond to the Tyrsenians.


2. What looks like multiple waves of Indo-European diffusion, similar to what happened in Greece, and quite a lot of diversity even within the IE languages on the peninsula.


And of course this leaves out Sicily and all the later influences (Greek, Punic, Arab, Norman, Lombard, etc.)
 
One tool to get a sense of the diversity in Italy is to look at the languages spoken there during the iron age. Even if language does not always map to ethnic identity, it's still a useful tool. To name a few (I am taking this mostly from Mallory):


Ligurian (Ligures, IE, possibly Celtic)
Lepontic (IE, Celtic)
Etruscan (Tyrsenian, non-IE)
Raetic (also thought to be Tyrsenian and related to Etruscan)
Umbrian (Umbri, related to Oscan)
Oscan (Sabines, Aurunci, Sidicini, Ausones)
Massapic (Iapyges, Dauni, Peucetii; possibly related to Illyrian)
N. Picene (undeciphered)
S. Picene (probably IE)
Venetic (IE, centum language, classification debatable)
Latin (closely related to Faliscan)
Faliscan (Falisci, closely related to Latin)


What this suggests is two things:


1. The presence of a neolithic Tyrsenian substrate; of course how extensive or homogeneous this was remains unknown. There could have been multiple non-IE peoples on the peninsula long before the arrival of the first Indo-Europeans. It would be interesting to know what hg(s) correspond to the Tyrsenians.


2. What looks like multiple waves of Indo-European diffusion, similar to what happened in Greece, and quite a lot of diversity even within the IE languages on the peninsula.


And of course this leaves out Sicily and all the later influences (Greek, Punic, Arab, Norman, Lombard, etc.)

On your list
Ligurian, spoke ancient tongue, then gaulish, then maybe celtic
lepontic, ok
Etruscan, Ok...depends if they began from southern Germany
Raetic , maybe...they could have been the father tongue of etruscans. etruscan after moving south mixed with italic languages
Umbrian , ok
Oscan, ok
Messapic , no one knows illyrian, so ? ....could even be epirote
N. Picene, luburinian
S.picene , umbrian mixed with doric greek from syracuse
Venetic, became celtic around 500BC according to uni of Heidelberg paper 2012
Latin, ok
Faliscan, ok
 
Faliscan,Latin,Umbrian,Ligurian,Lepontic , Venetic speaking people's where probably italics; celts. Etruscan's and Raetic speakers where proto-Georgians/Armenians, Messapic speakers where Cretans; the Sabellic tongues where said to be related to the Oscan one and they where all somehow related to Umbrian, so take from that what you will, I don't know if the linguistic scenario also speaks for the genetic one. Piceni dialects as Sile stated may have been Umbrian with some Greek affect mixed in as well.
 
My knowledge is very short about Greece and Italy -
I red somewhere (B.Sergent?) the Elymes lands in Sicily had a lot of ligurian or close-ligurian placenames (substratum) with a taste of placenames of balkanic origin, something close to illyrian - -
the Ligurians could have been the first inhabitants (identified ones) - but the personal names would have been the more often of italic origin, with someones of anatolian origin, the language seemed between latine-falisc and osco-umbrian...
I admit it is a bit complicated!
by the way, ligurian is clearly not celtic, and shows a position between celtic and italic, more on an archaïc side -
so the Elymes could have took a part of Sicily on the cost of previous Ligurians - close to the Philistos hypothesis saying Sicules = Ligurians or family???
 
False, the Elymians where literally Dardanians of the Troad region, Trojan citizens fleeing the sack of Troy by Greeks such as the Achaeans. Their hero was Acestes, he founded Segesta,Entella,Eryx probably. So basically it goes as follows: Acestes and his group of several thousand colonizers left Troy and arrived in western Sicily. Afterwards, Aeneas the Trojan would arrive as wel with more people, for them, the Elymians would build he aforementioned cities; a Trojan region of extreme western Sicily.
 

This thread has been viewed 58689 times.

Back
Top