Tunisians, Egyptians and Syrians?

[wvwvw]

The average Tunisian look hugely black influenced, but some Berbers can indeed look similar to Greeks

[wvwvw]

The op scares me. He seems always high...

Why you continue to say that Romans are Hellenes?

Because they were. At least the early Romans. The Romans worshiped the same Gods ad the Greeks because the Gods of Greece were real historical kings who lived between 1800 and 1600 BC and reigned in both Greece and Italy.

Rome was originally founded by Rhomanessus the son of Roma the daughter of Italus in 1438 BC. Before him the territory of Rome was under the rule of the kings of Ianiculum who I have already listed.

"The origin of the Roman people from the founders Janus and Saturn, through
the rulers succeeding each other, to the tenth consulate of Constantius,
digested from the authors: Verrius Flaccus, Antias (that's how this Verrius
preferred to call [him], rather than 'Antia'), then from the Pontifical
Annals, then Cincius, Egnatius, Veratius, Fabius Pictor, Licinius Macro,
Varro, Caesar, Tubero, and from all the old histories; then those writing
about recent times, that is Livy and Victor Afer. "

"This fortress was founded by Father Janus, and that one by
Saturnus.

And later:

This one was called Janiculum, that one Saturnia. "

[MinervaItalica]

Because they were. At least the early Romans. The Romans worshiped the same Gods ad the Greeks because the Gods of Greece were real historical kings who lived between 1800 and 1600 BC and reigned in both Greece and Italy.

Rome was originally founded by Rhomanessus the son of Roma the daughter of Italus in 1438 BC. Before him the territory of Rome was under the rule of the kings of Ianiculum who I have already listed.

"The origin of the Roman people from the founders Janus and Saturn, through
the rulers succeeding each other, to the tenth consulate of Constantius,
digested from the authors: Verrius Flaccus, Antias (that's how this Verrius
preferred to call [him], rather than 'Antia'), then from the Pontifical
Annals, then Cincius, Egnatius, Veratius, Fabius Pictor, Licinius Macro,
Varro, Caesar, Tubero, and from all the old histories; then those writing
about recent times, that is Livy and Victor Afer. "

"This fortress was founded by Father Janus, and that one by
Saturnus.

And later:

This one was called Janiculum, that one Saturnia. "

Please...
They only adopted their culture because is what they did when they conquered new territories and peoples.

Are you basing the origins of the Latins on legends? Latins are an Italic people native to Latium (present day Lazio). The Ancient Greeks never settled there... they have nothing to do with the ethnicity of the Romans. On the other side, Greeks became Roman citizens when Rome conquered Greece.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latins_(Italic_tribe)

[wvwvw]

Please...
They only adopted their culture because is what they did when they conquered new territories and peoples.

Are you basing the origins of the Latins on Legends? Latins are an Italic people native to Latium (Modern day Lazio) The Ancient Greeks never settled there...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latins_(Italic_tribe)

The Greeks had colonies in Italy since Mycenaean times and that is not disputed. Pelasgian Greeks and Corinthian Greeks colonised Etruria, along with Tyrsenoian Maeonians.

Italy was a Greek colony since the time of Kronos (Saturn) . This has been proven beyond doubt by the presence of Minoan and Mycenaean artefacts which confirm historians accounts.

The Romans were Greek colonists who came to Italy from Troy which was a Greek colony populated by Greeks who originally came from Crete, Athens and Arcadia according to historical accounts.
Archaeologists also confirm the presence of Cretan and Mycenaean artefacts at Troy, and the fact that its culture was essentially the same as that of Greece.

The script the Romans used was derived from Cadmian Phoenician script that was brought to Italy from Greece by the Arcadians (1460 BC) including Evander, the Metapontians who were descended from Aeolus (1330 BC), the Cretans that came to Italy with Minos (1250 BC), the Trojans and the Greeks who left Troy (1181 BC), and the Pelasgians from Thessaly that settled in Etruria above the Tyrsenoi and the conquered them and the later Greek colonists sent from Sparta, Messenia and Corinth which even provided Rome with its last kings, the Tarquini. The Tarquini were Greeks from Corinth. Read Livy.

Why do you think the first Romans wrote in Greek and not Latin. Julius Caesar could trace the origin of his forefathers to Trojans. His family name the Iulii/Julius is a Greek name and is the same Greek name as the Trojan king Ilus who he was named after and Helius.

The primitive Greek Romans were the result of the union of the Greek tribes of Italy. These Greek tribes were the Aborigines who came to the area of Rome from Achaia, Greece many generations before the Trojan War. These Aborigines had already accepted into their tribe the Greek Pelasgians of Italy. Porcius Cato's inclusion of the history of the Pelasgians in Italy and their union with the Aborigines in his De Origines, repeated in detail by Dionysius.

These combined Aborigines and Pelasgians united with some Trojans who migrated to their land and together they became the ancient Greek speaking Latins whose capital was Alba Longa. A branch of these Latins of Alba Longa, led by the brothers Romulus and Romus, founded Rome on the Palatine and Capitoline Hills. They were joined by some of the Greek Sabines of Italy who had been settled on the adjacent Quirinal Hill. The Sabines had migrated to Italy from Lacedaemonia in Southern Greece. The Romans continued the process of subduing and including the rest of the Greek Latins and Sabines into their political system.

Some of the Danubian Celts entered Northern Italy and began pressing upon the Etruscans who turned to Rome for help. But these Celts overran the Roman forces who tried to stop them and drove down toward Rome and defeated the main Roman army in battle and entered Rome in 390 BC. They occupied the whole of the city except the steep Capitoline Hill. After receiving a substantial ransom of gold the Celts withdrew. In order to better protect themselves the Romans subdued the rest of Northern Italy.

Then Hannibal invaded Italy with his famous elephants and became the biggest threat to Rome and with Macedon as an ally. Macedon had conquered Rome's traditional Greek allies. The Romans had crossed over into Greece to liberate her Greek allies from Macedon and ended up conquering the whole Greek Macedonian Empire and incorporating it into the Roman Empire.

It is to be noted that it was the Greek Romans of Italy who finally united all Greek speaking tribes into one nation which had become Latin speaking also. The first four Roman annalists who wrote in Greek were Quintus Fabius Pictor, Lucius Cincius Alimentus, Gaius Acilius and Aulus Postumius Albinus. The first Roman historians who wrote in Latin were Porcius Cato.

All the history of Roman was preserved in the official Roman "sacred tablets" (hierais deltois) which the first historians simply repeated. In other words they were themselves annalists.

From Cato the Gallo-Roman revolutionaries realized that the Romans and Greeks were the same people. Now the overwhelming majority of Gallo-Romans were re-gaining control of the land occupied for so many centuries by a tyrannical Frankish minority of only 2% of the population. The enthusiasm for Greco-Roman antiquity and hatred for a papal Christianity used by the Frankish conqueror to completely debase 85% of the population led even to making natural religion supreme over supernatural religion. In spite of Cato's role in the French Revolution only fragments of his work are publicly known. But since Dionysius of Halicarnassus used the same annals as the aforementioned Roman historians one must use Dionysius to reconstruct these lost or hidden sources. Dionysius makes a clear distinction between Greek historians who do not use Roman annals and the Roman historians (and himself) who do. The trick used by some historians, who want to efface the Greek foundations of Roman history, is to mix the hearsay Greek tradition about Rome and the 3 Roman variations on the tradition about the founding of Rome found in their own hierais deltois, i.e. sacred tablets, which were evidently made of a hard material, and then to heap ridicule on the mixture they themselves create.

Only a short, but accurate summary account of the foundation annals are reported in Livy who takes for granted that Rome was founded as a Greek city and nation. Evidently this is so because he wrote his history in Latin, whereas the annals were evidently in Greek. Those who wrote in Greek simply copied what they read in Greek. It was the annalistic history of Hemina which laid the foundations for writing Roman history in Latin. Evidently, however, he and his imitators did not make full use of all the Greek texts, like speeches, at their disposal. Whereas those who wrote their histories in Greek simply copied the Greek texts directly from the annals. Since the primitive Romans were Greeks why should the official annals be in what we now call Latin. The primitive Latins and Romans were a mixture of
Greek Arcadians, Trojans, Pelasgians and Lacedaemonian Sabines.

Because all three groups of Romans, Latins and Sabines came to Italy by sea from Greece and Asia minor they were warrior sailors and sea faring peoples. It is obviously for this reason that at their weddings they shouted the Greek word Thalassios, sailor, at the groom and not the Latin name marinos.

The very existence of the primitive Greek Romans has been abolished by those who continue to support Charlemagne's Lie of 794 which inaugurated the historical dogma that the Roman language was and is Latin. This has remained so in spite of the Roman sources which describe Greek as the first language of the Romans. It seems that Charlemagne's Lie of 794 was based on hearsay and the need to cut off West Romans enslaved to the Franco-Latins from the free East Romans. Frankish Emperor Louis II (855-875) clearly supports Charlemagne's Lie of 794 with the following words: In 871 he writes to Emperor of the Romans Basil I (867-885) that ".we have received the government of the Roman Empire for our orthodoxy . The Greeks have ceased to be emperors of the Romans for their cacodoxy.
Not only have they deserted the city (of Rome) and the capital of the Empire, but they have also abandoned Roman nationality and even the Latin language. They have migrated to another capital city and taken up a completely different nationality and language."

[MinervaItalica]

The Greeks had colonies in Italy since Mycenaean times and that is not disputed. Pelasgian Greeks and Corinthian Greeks colonised Etruria, along with Tyrsenoian Maeonians.

The Greeks had colonies only in South Italy and have nothing to do with the founding of Rome.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_Graecia



Etruria is pretty much out of Greek colonization.

Italy was a Greek colony since the time of Kronos (Saturn) . This has been proven beyond doubt by the presence of Minoan and Mycenaean artefacts which confirm historians accounts.

Source?

The Romans were Greek colonists who came to Italy from Troy which was a Greek colony populated by Greeks who originally came from Crete, Athens and Arcadia according to historical accounts.
Archaeologists also confirm the presence of Cretan and Mycenaean artefacts at Troy, and the fact that its culture was essentially the same as that of Greece.

Legend.

Why do you think the first Romans wrote in Greek and not Latin. Julius Caesar could trace the origin of his forefathers to Trojans. His family name the Iulii/Julius is a Greek name and is the same Greek name
as the Trojan king Ilus who he was named after and Helius.

Bullshit. The Latins spoke Old Latin since the kingdom era
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Kingdom

The Greek was an important cultural language ofc but not official in the Roman Empire only during the Byzantine Empire became official.

The primitive Greek Romans were the result of the union of the Greek speaking tribes of Italy. These Greek tribes were the Aborigines who came to the area of Rome from Achaia, Greece many generations before the Trojan War. These Aborigines had already accepted into their tribe the Greek Pelasgians of Italy. Porcius Cato's inclusion of the history of the Pelasgians in Italy and their union with the Aborigines in his De Origines, repeated in detail by Dionysius.

These combined Aborigines and Pelasgians united with some Trojans who migrated to their land and together they became the ancient Greek speaking Latins whose capital was Alba Longa. A branch
of these Greek speaking Latins of Alba Longa, led by the brothers Romulus and Romus, founded Rome on the Palatine and Capitoline Hills. They were joined by some of the Greek Sabines of Italy who had been settled on the adjacent Quirinal Hill. The Sabines had migrated to Italy from Lacedaemonia in Southern Greece. The Romans continued the process of subduing and including the rest of the Greek Latins and Sabines into their political system.

Some of the Danubian Celts entered Northern Italy and began pressing upon the Etruscans who turned to Rome for help. But these Celts overran the Roman forces who tried to stop them and drove down toward Rome and defeated the main Roman army in battle and entered Rome in 390 BC. They occupied the whole of the city except the steep Capitoline Hill. After receiving a substantial ransom of gold the Celts withdrew. In order to better protect themselves the Romans subdued the rest of Northern Italy.

Then Hannibal invaded Italy with his famous elephants and became the biggest threat to Rome and with Macedon as an ally. Macedon had conquered Rome's traditional Greek allies. The Romans had crossed over into Greece to liberate her Greek allies from Macedon and ended up conquering the whole Greek Macedonian Empire and incorporating it into the Roman Empire.

It is to be noted that it was the Greek Romans of Italy who finally united all Greek speaking tribes into one nation which had become Latin speaking also. The first four Roman annalists who wrote in Greek were Quintus Fabius Pictor, Lucius Cincius Alimentus, Gaius Acilius and Aulus Postumius Albinus. The first Roman historians who wrote in Latin were Porcius Cato.

All the history of Roman was preserved in the official Roman "sacred tablets" (hierais deltois) which the first historians simply repeated. In other words they were themselves annalists.

From Cato the Gallo-Roman revolutionaries realized that the Romans and Greeks were the same people. Now the overwhelming majority of Gallo-Romans were re-gaining control of the land occupied for so many centuries by a tyrannical Frankish minority of only 2% of the population. The enthusiasm for Greco-Roman antiquity and hatred for a papal Christianity used by the Frankish conqueror to completely debase 85% of the population led even to making natural religion supreme over supernatural religion. In spite of Cato's role in the French Revolution only fragments of his work are publicly known. But since Dionysius of Halicarnassus used the same annals as the aforementioned
Roman historians one must use Dionysius to reconstruct these lost or hidden sources. Dionysius makes a clear distinction between Greek historians who do not use Roman annals and the Roman historians (and himself) who do. The trick used by some historians, who want to efface the Greek foundations of Roman history, is to mix the hearsay Greek tradition about Rome and the 3 Roman variations on the tradition about the founding of Rome found in their own hierais deltois, i.e. sacred
tablets, which were evidently made of a hard material, and then to heap ridicule on the mixture they themselves create.

Only a short, but accurate summary account of the foundation annals are reported in Livy who takes for granted that Rome was founded as a Greek city and nation. Evidently this is so because he wrote his history in Latin, whereas the annals were evidently in Greek. Those who wrote in Greek simply copied what they read in Greek. It was the annalistic history of Hemina which laid the foundations for writing Roman history in Latin. Evidently, however, he and his imitators did not make full use of all the Greek texts, like speeches, at their disposal. Whereas those who wrote their histories in Greek simply copied the Greek texts directly from the annals. Since the primitive Romans were Greeks why should the official annals be in what we now call Latin. The primitive Latins and Romans were a mixture of
Greek Arcadians, Trojans, Pelasgians and Lacedaemonian Sabines.

Because all three groups of Romans, Latins and Sabines came to Italy by sea from Greece and Asia minor they were warrior sailors and sea faring peoples. It is obviously for this reason that at their
weddings they shouted the Greek word Thalassios, sailor, at the groom and not the Latin name marinos.

The very existence of the primitive Greek Romans has been abolished and continue to support Charlemagne's Lie of 794 which inaugurated the historical dogma that the Roman language was and is Latin. This has remained so in spite of the Roman sources which describe Greek as the first language of the Romans. It seems that Charlemagne's Lie of 794 was based on hearsay and the need to cut off West Romans enslaved to the Franco-Latins from the free East Romans. Frankish Emperor Louis II (855-875) clearly supports Charlemagne's Lie of 794 with the following words: In 871 he writes to Emperor of the Romans Basil I (867-885) that ".we have received the government of the Roman Empire for our orthodoxy . The Greeks have ceased to be emperors of the Romans for their cacodoxy.
Not only have they deserted the city (of Rome) and the capital of the Empire, but they have also abandoned Roman nationality and even the Latin language. They have migrated to another capital city and taken up a completely different nationality and language."

You know, when posting so much a source would be needed but considering your previous posts in this forum i doubt you will be able to provide a good one.

Again, the Ancient Greeks have nothing to do with the Romans (Latins) nor with the foundation of Rome which was build by the Latins starting from a small village.

The city of Rome originated as a village of the Latini in the 9th century BC.


"Rome grew from pastoral settlements on the Palatine Hill and surrounding hills approximately 30 km (19 mi) from the Tyrrhenian Sea on the south side of the Tiber. The Quirinal Hill was probably an outpost for the Sabines, another Italic-speaking people. At this location, the Tiber forms a Z-shaped curve that contains an island where the river can be forded. Because of the river and the ford, Rome was at a crossroads of traffic following the river valley and of traders traveling north and south on the west side of the peninsula."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Rome

[wvwvw]

The Greeks had colonies only in South Italy and have nothing to do with the founding of Rome.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magna_Graecia





Source?



Legend.

The script the Romans used was derived from Cadmian Phoenician script that was brought to Italy from Greece by the Arcadians (1460 BC) including Evander, the Metapontians who were descended from Aeolus (1330 BC), the Cretans that came to Italy with Minos (1250 BC), the Trojans and the Greeks
who left Troy (1181 BC), and the Pelasgians from Thessaly that settled in Etruria above the Tyrsenoi and the conquered them and the later Greek colonists sent from Sparta, Messenia and Corinth which even provided Rome with its last kings, the Tarquini. The Tarquini were Greeks from Corinth. Read Livy.



Bullshit. The Latins spoke Old Latin since the kingdom era
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Kingdom

The Greek was an important cultural language ofc but not official in the Roman Empire only during the Byzantine Empire became official.



You know, when posting so much a source would be needed but considering your previous posts in this forum i doubt you will be able to provide a good one.

Again, the Latins have nothing to do with the Ancient Greeks nor with the foundation of Rome which was build by the Latins starting from a small village.


"Rome grew from pastoral settlements on the Palatine Hill and surrounding hills approximately 30 km (19 mi) from the Tyrrhenian Sea on the south side of the Tiber. The Quirinal Hill was probably an outpost for the Sabines, another Italic-speaking people. At this location, the Tiber forms a Z-shaped curve that contains an island where the river can be forded. Because of the river and the ford, Rome was at a crossroads of traffic following the river valley and of traders traveling north and south on the west side of the peninsula."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Rome

My sources are Ancient Greek and Roman sources. You clearly have not read the work of any ancient historians yourself.

Spoiler!

Diodorus of Halicarnussus states the following.

"I shall come to the Roman historians. The Romans, to be sure, have not so
much as one single historian or chronicler who is ancient; however, each of
their historians has taken something out of ancient accounts that are
preserved on sacred tablets."

2 Some of these say that Romulus and Remus, the founders of Rome, were the
sons of Aeneas, others say that they were the sons of a daughter of Aeneas,
without going on to determine who was their father; that they were delivered
as hostages by Aeneas to Latinus, the king of the Aborigines, when the
treaty was made between the inhabitants and the new-comers, and that
Latinus, after giving them a kindly welcome, not only did them might good
offices, but, upon dying without male issue, left them his successors to
some part of his kingdom. 3 Others say that after the death of Aeneas
Ascanius, having succeeded to the entire sovereignty of the Latins, divided
both the country and the forces of the Latins into three parts, two of which
he gave to his brothers, Romulus and Remus. He himself, they say, built Alba
and some other towns; Remus built cities which he named Capuas, after Capys,
his great-grandfather, Anchisa, after his grandfather Anchises, Aeneia
(which was afterwards called Janiculum), after his father, and Rome, after
himself.192 This last city was for some time deserted, but upon the arrival
of another colony, which the Albans sent out under the leadership of Romulus
and Remus, it received again its ancient name. So that, according to this
account, there were two settlements of Rome, one a little after the Trojan
war, and the other fifteen generations after the first.193

"And if anyone desires to look into the remoter past, even a third Rome will
be found, more ancient than these, one that was founded before Aeneas and
the Trojans came into Italy. This is related by no ordinary or modern
historian, but by Antiochus of Syracuse, whom I have mentioned before.194 He
says that when Morges reigned in Italy (which at that time comprehended all
the seacoast from Tarentum to Posidonia),195 a man came to him who had been
banished from Rome. His words are these: "When Italus was growing old,
Morges reigned. In his reign there came a man who had been banished from
Rome; his name was Seicelus." 5 According to the Syracusan historian,
therefore, an ancient Rome is found even earlier than the Trojan war."

"That the canons of Eratosthenes are sound I have shown in another
treatise,202 where I have also shown how the Roman chronology is to be
synchronized with that of the Greeks. 3 For I did not think it sufficient,
like Polybius of Megalopolis,203 to say merely that I believe Rome was built
in the second year of the seventh Olympiad,204 nor to let my belief rest
without further examination upon the single tablet preserved by the high
priests, the only one of its kind, but I determined to set forth the reasons
that had appealed to me, so that all might examine them who so desired. 4 In
that treatise, therefore, the detailed exposition is given; but in the
course of the present work also the most essential of the conclusions there
reached will be mentioned. The matter stands thus: It is generally agreed
that the invasion of the Gauls,205 during which the city of Rome was taken,
happened during the archonship of Pyrgion at Athens, in the first year of
the ninety-eighth Olympiad.206 Now if the time before the taking of the city
is reckoned back to Lucius Junius Brutus and Lucius Tarquinius Collatinus,
the first consuls at Rome after the overthrow of the kings, it comprehends
one hundred and twenty years. 5 This is proved in many other ways, but
particularly by the records of the censors, which receives in succession
from the father and takes great care to transmit to posterity, like family
rites; and there are many illustrious men of censorian families who preserve
these records. In them I find that in the second year before the taking of
the city there was a census of the Roman people, to which, as to the rest of
them, there is affixed the date, as follows: "In the consulship of Lucius
Valerius Potitus and Titus Manlius Capitolinus, in the one hundred and
nineteenth year after the expulsion of the kings." 6 So that the Gallic
invasion, which we find to have occurred in the second year after the
census, happened when the hundred and twenty years were completed. If, now,
this interval of time is found to consist of thirty Olympiads, it must be
allowed that the first consuls to be chosen entered upon their magistracy in
the first year of the sixty-eighth Olympiad, the same year that Isagoras was
archon at Athens.207
75 And, again, if from the expulsion of the kings the time is reckoned back
to Romulus, the first ruler of the city, it amounts to two hundred and
forty-four years. This is known from the order in which the kings succeeded
one another and the number of years each of them ruled. For Romulus, the
founder of Rome, reigned thirty-seven years, it is said, and after his death
the city was a year without a king. 2 Then Numa Pompilius, who was chosen by
the people, reigned forty-three years; after Numa, Tullus Hostilius
thirty-two; and his successor, Ancus Marcius, twenty-four; after Marcius,
Lucius Tarquinius, called Priscus, thirty-eight; Servius Tullius, who
succeeded him, forty-four. And the slayer of Servius, Lucius Tarquinius, the
tyrannical prince who, from his contempt of justice, was called Superbus,
extended his reign to the twenty-fifth year. 3 As the reigns, therefore, of
the kings amount to two hundred and forty-four years or sixty-one Olympiads,
it follows necessarily that Romulus, the first ruler of the city, began his
reign in the first year of the seventh Olympiad, when Charops at Athens was
in the first year of his ten-year term as archon.208 For the count of the
years requires this; and that each king reigned the number of years is shown
in that treatise of mine to which I have referred.

4 This, therefore, is the account given by those who lived before me and
adopted by me concerning the time of the settlement of the city which now
rules supreme."

Romulus built Rome. Romulus made the laws of Rome. Read Livy.

Their oldest records were held in the temples on stone tablets and that was who Roman historians used as their primary sources.

ALL ancient historical sources from all writers, primary, secondary and so on said the same thing. All twenty five and thirty distinct versions said exactly the same thing. Romulus and Remus founded Rome, and this is not challenged by any of them. If you ask a class of students to describe WW2 they are not all going to talk about it in the same way but all their histories are going to include the exact same facts.

[MinervaItalica]

Romulus built Rome. Romulus made the laws of Rome. Read Livy.

Their oldest records were held in the temples on stone tablets and that was who Roman historians used as their primary sources.

ALL ancient historical sources from all writers, primary, secondary and so on said the same thing. All twenty five and thirty distinct versions said exactly the same thing. Romulus and Remus founded Rome, and this is not challenged by any of them. If you ask a class of students to describe WW2 they are not all going to talk about it in the same way but all their histories are going to include the exact same facts.

You know what? I think you're on high too and probably copied all that text from a random blog online without using your own head. There are plenty blogs with historical revisions on the internet. Ancient Greek and Latin historians were famous to write legends about the foundation of the city... i would prefer to see modern historians sources who talk about actual facts.

The Foundation of Rome by Romulus and Remus is a MYTH.

[wvwvw]

Bullshit. The Latins spoke Old Latin since the kingdom era
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_Kingdom

The Romans gave the name Latin to those Italian tribes who revolted demanding Roman citizenship. Instead they were given the Latin name in 85 BC. The name Latin had belonged to the ancient Greek Latins who had been absorbed into the Roman nation along with the Greek-speaking Sabines. The Italian Latins of 85 BC were given the Roman name in 212. Finally various Germano-Frankish tribes took or were given the name Latin. We use the name Franco-Latins for these Germano-Frankish tribes in order to distinguish them from the Greek speaking and Italian speaking Latins of Roman history.

Who do you think Morges, Italus and Latinus were?

According to Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Morges was the successor of the Oenotrian king Italus, and hospitably received Siculus, who had been driven out of Latium by the Aborigines, in consequence of which the earlier Oenotrians were called Italietes, Morgetes, and Siculi; according to this account, the Morgetes ought to be regarded as a branch of the Oenotrians.
https://www.gtp.gr/LocInfo.asp?infoi...=1&LocId=63232

And who do think the Oenetrians were? Oenotrus
(Oinotros). A son of Lycaon. He was fabled to have passed with a body of followers from Arcadia into Southern Italy, and to have given the name of Oenotria to that part of the country where he settled.

Italus
According to the historians one of the settlers there, a certain Italus, became king of Oenotria, and from him they took the name of Italians instead of that of Oenotrians, and the name of Italy was given to all that promontory of Europe lying between the Gulfs of Scylletium and of Lametus, which are half a day's journey apart.

Italus, (Italos). A fabled monarch of early Italy, said to have been the son of Telegonus by Penelope. Telegonus was the son of Odysseus.

Latinus (Latin: Lătīnŭs; Ancient Greek: Λατῖνος) was a figure in both Greek and Roman mythology. He is often associated with the heroes of the Trojan War, namely Odysseus and Aeneas. In Hesiod's Theogony,[1] Latinus was the son of Odysseus and Circe who ruled the Tyrsenoi, presumably the Etruscans, with his brothers Ardeas and Telegonus.

Again, the Latins have nothing to do with the Ancient Greeks nor with the foundation of Rome

See above

[MinervaItalica]

The Romans gave the name Latin to those Italian tribes who revolted demanding Roman citizenship. Instead they were given the Latin name in 85 BC. The name Latin had belonged to the ancient Greek Latins who had been absorbed into the Roman nation along with the Greek-speaking Sabines. The Italian Latins of 85 BC were given the Roman name in 212. Finally various Germano-Frankish tribes took or were given the name Latin. We use the name Franco-Latins for these Germano-Frankish tribes in order to distinguish them from the Greek speaking and Italian speaking Latins of Roman history.

Who do you think Morges, Italus and Latinus were?

According to Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Morges was the successor of the Oenotrian king Italus, and hospitably received Siculus, who had been driven out of Latium by the Aborigines, in consequence of which the earlier Oenotrians were called Italietes, Morgetes, and Siculi; according to this account, the Morgetes ought to be regarded as a branch of the Oenotrians.
https://www.gtp.gr/LocInfo.asp?infoi...=1&LocId=63232

And who do think the Oenetrians were? Oenotrus
(Oinotros). A son of Lycaon. He was fabled to have passed with a body of followers from Arcadia into Southern Italy, and to have given the name of Oenotria to that part of the country where he settled.

Italus
According to the historians one of the settlers there, a certain Italus, became king of Oenotria, and from him they took the name of Italians instead of that of Oenotrians, and the name of Italy was given to all that promontory of Europe lying between the Gulfs of Scylletium and of Lametus, which are half a day's journey apart.

Italus, (Italos). A fabled monarch of early Italy, said to have been the son of Telegonus by Penelope. Telegonus was the son of Odysseus.

Latinus (Latin: Lătīnŭs; Ancient Greek: Λατῖνος) was a figure in both Greek and Roman mythology. He is often associated with the heroes of the Trojan War, namely Odysseus and Aeneas. In Hesiod's Theogony,[1] Latinus was the son of Odysseus and Circe who ruled the Tyrsenoi, presumably the Etruscans, with his brothers Ardeas and Telegonus.



See above

Keep talking about legends...
The only thing you can do.

Italus is another Myth...
Sabines spoke an Oscan language.

[wvwvw]

You know what? I think you're on high too and probably copied all that text from a random blog online without using your own head. There are plenty blogs with historical revisions on the internet. Ancient Greek and Latin historians were famous to write legends about the foundation of the city... i would prefer to see modern historians sources who talk about actual facts

The Foundation of Rome by Romulus and Remus is a MYTH.

Myth and Historia had the same meaning in Ancient Greece. Read Aristotle's definition of myth (he defines it as fact)