[SunkenCiv]

the Etruscans, like most Ancient sailors, would probably have followed the coastlines wherever possible, which would have made the journy even longer.

Had they, it's a sure bet that the Angles, Saxons, and Jutes would have also, because there was no technological change in the interim. The back-and-forth to the Tyrhennian coast (and Rome, eventually) involved use of the Straits of Messina because it was shorter; coastal sailing wasn't generally preferred, although there's a longstanding idea that it was, despite all the surviving ancient texts to the contrary. Sicily wasn't picked because it was already occupied by the local population. Even in Mycenaean times the Greeks had some kind of trading or colonial presence in Sicily, and of course later the Phoenicians and Carthaginians.

---

-inthos place names, from, hmm, Settegast?

---

[ZULU]

Then the Anglo-Saxons would have to have sailed down the coast to opposite Dover I guess where could visiually see Britain and then across initally.

I did read a book that indicated the Romans may have settled the Anglo-Saxons along the east coast of Britain as foederati to help protect it against attacks by other Anglo-Saxons. Later, after the Roman legions were withdrawn the Saxons turned on the native Britons.

But then there is that story about Port and Hengist and Horsa. Interesting stuff.

The Vikings had no problem crossing open waters not much later than the Anglo-Saxons, but their skills and ships were probably superior.

Check this out:

http://www.kami.demon.co.uk/gesithas/index.html

You have to download the Media player to hear the Angl-Saxon speech. It sounds Germanic and looks it also.