Lucy Shipley (18:06)
So this is a real can of worms. And I think we've been quite light on chronology so far, but I'm going to go heavy with my chronology now. So, right, we are going to start way back in the late Bronze Age. So we're talking the sort of turn of the 10th century BC and in Italian you say it's the Bronzo finale. And we have these different cultures living in Italy throughout the Bronze Age with sort of a whole setup of material culture. And in the area that's now we recognize as those Etruscan heartlands, we're starting to see a package of behavior and material culture that we can trace through to later Etruscan civilizations. And this late Bronze Age develops into something called the Villanovan culture. The type site is at Villanova, just outside Bologna. And in 1853, they found a sort of cremation cemetery with this very clear pattern of cremated bodies placed in these impasto pots. That's the Italian word for this type of ceramic. And they have grave goods as well. So they have, like, fibulae, which are these very fancy brooches. They might have razors. They have additional ceramics. And it's a pattern that we see across Etruria throughout this Villanovan period, this package. So a really lovely case study is inland, there's a city called Cusi. At Cusi, what we see is this really lovely, consistent pattern that starts in this Villanovan period and continues all the way through to even after the Roman conquest of Etruria, where we have people who are being cremated, buried with additional ceramics and placed in these urns that have meaning. So it's a lovely example of archaeological continuity. And we could argue that all the way across the Troy, there's oodles of archaeological evidence that suggests that the Etruscans are an Italian people. They developed out of these late Bronze Age Italian groups, and they were always here. However, our old friend Herodotus argues something completely different. So he tells this kind of almost like a fairy tale. There's this famine in Lydia. It's terrible. There is not enough food. People are dying, People are starving. What are we going to do? We need a hero. And upsets this king's son, whose name happens to be Tyrannus. And he says, I will go westwards and find new land, and I will take those people that this land cannot support with me. And he, according to Herodotus, is the first person to sort of settle Etruria and presumably hoofs out a load of local people who are already living there and having a lovely time in the late Bronze Age. Thank you very much. So there is this idea that actually, are the Etruscans from somewhere else? And we've spoken about Etruscan being a non Indo European language, different from other local languages like Oscan or Latin or Umbrian. So very different. Maybe that actually is because they do come from somewhere else. So it's that tension between the archaeology and then the historic texts and to an extent, the linguistics, and which of those two is right. So we're at slight contretemps. I would say that the classical sources kind of had the upper hand for a long time in this 1930s period, where Italian nationalism is really dominating archaeological conversations. Amazing archaeologist, Etruscologist called Massimo Palotino sits down and writes in 1939, on the eve of the Second World War, his thesis that the Etruscans are indigenous. And it's some of the most nuanced, beautiful archaeological arguments. It is wonderful to watch this man's mind at work and you can feel that urgency as well. He's not sure what's going to happen, can see this kind of cataclysm coming in his own time, and he wants to get his ideas down on paper. He wants to argue for that indigenous hypothesis. And it's really tricky because sometimes bad politics can actually result in good science. So the need for him to justify those Italian origins actually resulted in him doing some fantastic deep work, looking at typologies of pottery, typologies of metalwork, comparing things with each other and making those connections. It's not very kind of sexy and exciting. It's not a fantastic fairy tale like the Herodotus story, but it is really dogged good work. So into the 20th century that really revolutionized everything, and people started recognizing, especially as archaeological discoveries got more and got better throughout the 20th century, that indigenous hypothesis really gained traction and was kind of the mainstream idea. But the Niri sin origins never went away. Enter DNA. Just as if this wasn't enough of a mess. So when the earliest archaeological DNA studies started happening, people working on the Etruscans got really excited. Understandably, of course, they did. Finally, we might have an answer. But unfortunately, a lot of those really early DNA studies on the Etruscans were kind of, I'm trying to be diplomatic, problematic in their methodology. So we had a series of studies where people were comparing modern DNA of people living in Tuscany. And I have worked in places where DNA samples were taken from modern populations, and people will talk about this to you. And they were compared with ancient remains. And people are like, oh, no, they're really different. So that does prove that the Etruscans came from somewhere else. It's like, well, no, it doesn't really. It's kind of that scientific logic isn't quite there to make that inference from that information. So not only do you have a very small sample size, one of the issues with the 19th century excavation of a large amount of burials is that they were not always the best at taking good care of the skeletal remains that they encountered, or burnt remains in the case of cremations. And so the pool from which we can use Etruscan human remains for DNA is relatively small, especially for those early studies that had really high parameters. So the authors of these studies argued that, hey, you know, maybe it looks like the external hypothesis is back on, and maybe they did come from the ancient near east until it was sort of roundly criticized. And people said, well, actually, look at Italy, the Roman Empire, you know, the invasions after the fall of the Roman Empire, people moving around the Mediterranean. I think it's really important to respect that kind of connection of landscape and place and feeling. But there's no reason that we might expect these people to be directly descended from the tiny individual Etruscan DNA genome that you've got hold of now. They also tried to do DNA on these special cattle, the Maremma cattle. They're from the Maremma marshes, and they said, oh, the cattle come from the ancient Near East. But the problem is all cattle come from the ancient near east, all domestic cattle breeds come from the ancient Near East. So we're not really any further forward. So this is whole mess going on. The DNA has kind of clouded the picture. It hasn't helped at all. But then in 2021, there is this fantastic DNA analysis comes through. And what they do is they compare ancient DNA from Etruria to other areas of ancient Italy. So they look at the Etruscans relationships with their neighbours rather than with their possible descendants, and it's just a completely different approach. And it works. They discover that actually the genomes that they've extracted from the Etruscan people who they've looked at are very similar to their neighbours, especially their neighbours to the south in Rome, also to the Umbrians higher up in the Apennines. So actually, this very good DNA study is looking like it confirms the indigenous hypothesis and that the archaeology was right. And it looks like whatever separation in terms of population genomics happened, it probably happened much later. I would not stick my neck out and say, etruscan origins, mystery solved, because, A, that spoils the fun, and B, you know, there could be another study in a couple of years that would make me look really silly, but I think it looks really likely that that painstaking archaeological work that was done in the 1930s is matching up with the very latest DNA evidence.