What did the Latins actually like before they helped to create Ancient Rome, and become "Romans"?

not necessarily hellenaboos, i'm sure they thought of the greeks as being too unmanly and artistic but it was also inevitable that they would look up to them at the same time for obvious reasons
i'm sure the etruscans were genuine hellenaboos though, since their culture was a lot closer

What's up with the Sicel people? Where they some of those pre-indo-european niggers or semitic or something?

But how did Etruscan civilization developed at exactly the same time Greece got out of it's Dark Ages? I think their influence on them is exaggerated. They only had a few things in common.

Not sure if they thought that of the Greeks as such really early on in their history. They borrowed massively from the Greeks in the form of religion, alphabet, culture (even gladiatorial fighting has Greek origin). Later on they had a real love/hate relationship with the Greeks. Even their founding myth shows this by having Aeneas be "Greek", and yet not Greek. Anyway, the early Romans were basically surrounded by Greeks culture from the Etruscans in the north and Greek colonies in the south.

They (especially the elite) were influenced heavily by Greece through trade. This manifested in many aspects of their culture, but especially art.

Nvm, I checked it out. Etruscan culture developed around 800 BC, then they seem to have adopted a Greek alphabet from the Phoenicians 100 years later. The actual direct Greek influence from Magna Graecia happens 150+ years later after after that.

Italians from central Italy, pushed into Sicily by Umbrians and Sabines.

>adopted a Greek alphabet from the Phoenicians 100 years later

Well did they adopt Greek or Phonecian?

Bumpo.

We can also draw conclusions based on the stories of their foundation.

Essentially getting their female population through abduction and rape.

>When Veii was conquered by the Romans, they captured the inhabitants and shouted:

Made me think...

That's just legend. Do you think Romulus and Remus were raised by a fucking wolf as well?

yes

>pre-indo-european niggers
Etruscans are generally thought to be. Sicels could've been too, but we don't really know, there's not really enough evidence to say conclusively if any of them were.

Likely there were plenty of pre-IE people around, there was enough space to share or to retreat to. Italy was also at a crossroads, between the Indo-European Balkans and pre-IE Iberian Peninsula, with both migrating towards Italy, so you've got up to four language groups living there at the same time:
>native pre-IE speakers, that've been there since Ötzi
>native speakers of Italic languages, that've been there a while
>Balkanigger Greek colonists
>Basquetcase pre-IE colonists

>native speakers of Italic languages, that've been there a while

They were the most recent arrivals compared to everywhere else in Europe. Only came in 1200 BC.

...

Exactly. Been there a while.

The Greeks used Linear A/B until the Dark Ages, when literacy effectively stopped. In the 8th Century BC the Greeks started writing Greek in the Phoenician alphabet, or at least a variation thereof

Did the Greeks use linear A, or was that just the Minoans?

Both the Latin and Etruscan alphabets are derived from the Magna Graecian variant of the Greek alphabet.

Nuragic civilization was rather impressive.

Linear B shares 80% of the same exact syllabic signs as Linear A. The Mycenaeans just used Linear A when they conquered Crete, and used their own language for the syllabic signs. Linear B was deciphered from assuming the signs were syllables and figuring how they worked out grammatically, and applying Archaic Greek to it and seeing if it made any sense. It was found that it did, but when assume the values of Linear B with A it comes out unintelligible and not discernibly Indo-European. It could be that it is IE, but the Minoans evidently had to a completely different method with how we're supposed to read the script, which is unlikely.

The relationship is like Sumerian and Akkadian. Both share the same script. Akkadian was figured out from the tri-lingual Behistun inscription (which contained Old Persian, Elamite, and Akkadian) from scholars just plugging in the knowledge of Iranic languages they had while trying to find a sort of grammar structured, which they deciphered Old Persian first. With Old Persian figured out, they could decipher Akkadian. When Akkadan was mostly deciphered back in the mid 19th century, they were finding tablets that didn't make sense when translated, which later turned out to be Sumerian. Sumerian was, however, happened to be lucky, since there were bilingual artifacts of it to give a sense of how it worked. There hasn't been any clear findings like that with Linear A and B being used together.

>Phoenician alphabet,

Daily reminder that the "phonecian" alphabet is actually Egyptian. This is like how we call Indian numerals "Arabic", Semites just can't stop stealing other people's culture and claiming it as their own.

It was an actual alphabet though, not just a bunch of autistic symbols.

Yes and no. The alphabet was created by Semites living in Egypt, who didn't want to go through the trouble of learning hieroglyph fuckery. Then it expanded northward to Semitic settlements.

Since this seems like a thread with people this might interest, I would like to recommend this. Pretty interesting read if you know latin.

mega.nz/#!vVpkGJoS!7xG5YCBHylZiTJBcNc-3URFX7TuYK12y3Uk0ciT_2Go