Pelasgians and the Lydians.

[42] Dionysius noted that the 5th-century historian Xanthus of Lydia,

who was originally from Sardis and was regarded as an important source and authority for the
history of Lydia, never suggested a Lydian origin of the Etruscans and never named Tyrrhenus
as a ruler of the Lydians.[42]
For this reason, therefore, I am persuaded that the Pelasgians are a different people from the
Tyrrhenians. And I do not believe, either, that the Tyrrhenians were a colony of the Lydians; for
they do not use the same language as the latter, nor can it be alleged that, though they no longer
speak a similar tongue, they still retain some other indications of their mother country. For they
neither worship the same gods as the Lydians nor make use of similar laws or institutions, but in
these very respects they differ more from the Lydians than from the Pelasgians. Indeed, those
probably come nearest to the truth who declare that the nation migrated from nowhere else, but
was native to the country, since it is found to be a very ancient nation and to agree with no other
either in its language or in its manner of living.
The credibility of Dionysius of Halicarnassus is arguably bolstered by the fact that he was the first
ancient writer to report the endonym of the Etruscans: Rasenna.
The Romans, however, give them other names: from the country they once inhabited, named
Etruria, they call them Etruscans, and from their knowledge of the ceremonies relating to divine
worship, in which they excel others, they now call them, rather inaccurately, Tusci, but formerly,
with the same accuracy as the Greeks, they called them Thyoscoï [an earlier form of Tusci].
Their own name for themselves, however, is the same as that of one of their leaders, Rasenna.
Similarly, the 1st-century BC historian Livy, in his Ab Urbe Condita Libri, said that the Rhaetians
were Etruscans who had been driven into the mountains by the invading Gauls; and he asserted
that the inhabitants of Raetia were of Etruscan origin. [43]
The Alpine tribes have also, no doubt, the same origin (of the Etruscans), especially the
Raetians; who have been rendered so savage by the very nature of the country as to retain
nothing of their ancient character save the sound of their speech, and even that is corrupted.
First-century historian Pliny the Elder also put the Etruscans in the context of the Rhaetian
people to the north, and wrote in his Natural History (AD 79):[44]
Adjoining these the (Alpine) Noricans are the Raeti and Vindelici. All are divided into a number of
states. The Raeti are believed to be people of Tuscan race driven out by the Gauls, their leader
was named Raetus.

Archeological evidence and modern etruscology[edit]

Main articles: Proto-Villanovan culture and Villanovan culture
The question of Etruscan origins has long been a subject of interest and debate among
historians. In modern times, all the evidence gathered so far by etruscologists points to an
indigenous origin of the Etruscans.[45][46][47][48] There is no archaeological or linguistic evidence of a
migration of the Lydians or Pelasgians into Etruria. [49][46][47][48] Modern etruscologists and
archeologists, such as Massimo Pallottino (1947), have shown that early historians’ assumptions
and assertions on the subject were groundless.[50] In 2000, the etruscologist Dominique
Briquel explained in detail why he believes that ancient Greek historians’ writings on Etruscan
origins should not even count as historical documents. [51] He argues that the ancient story of the
Etruscans’ 'Lydian origins' was a deliberate, politically motivated fabrication, and that ancient
Greeks inferred a connection between the Tyrrhenians and the Pelasgians solely on the basis of
certain Greek and local traditions and on the mere fact that there had been trade between the
Etruscans and Greeks.[52][53] He noted that, even if these stories include historical facts suggesting
contact, such contact is more plausibly traceable to cultural exchange than to migration. [54]
Several archaeologists who have analyzed Bronze Age and Iron Age remains that were
excavated in the territory of historical Etruria have pointed out that no evidence has been found,
related either to material culture or to social practices, that can support a migration theory.[55] The
most marked and radical change that has been archaeologically attested in the area is the
adoption, starting in about the 12th century BC, of the funeral rite of incineration in terracotta
urns, which is a Continental European practice, derived from the Urnfield culture; there is nothing
about it that suggests an ethnic contribution from Asia Minor or the Near East.[55]

Painted terracotta Sarcophagus of Seianti Hanunia Tlesnasa, about 150–130 BC.

A 2012 survey of the previous 30 years’ archaeological findings, based on excavations of the
major Etruscan cities, showed a continuity of culture from the last phase of the Bronze Age
(13th–11th century BC) to th