On the Celticity of the Adriatic Veneti

[Smaug]

The Veneti were an Indo-European people who inhabited north-eastern Italy, in an area corresponding to the modern-day region of Veneto. The ancient Veneti spoke Venetic, an extinct Indo-European language which is attested in approximately 300 short inscriptions dating from the 6th to 1st centuries BC. Venetic appears to share several similarities with Latin and the Italic languages, but also has some affinities with other IE languages, especially Germanic and Celtic. Venetic should not be confused with Venetian, a Romance language presently spoken in the region.



The Veneti, in Northeastern Italy, corresponding to the modern Region of Veneto.



Overview of the Hallstatt and La Tène cultures. The core Hallstatt territory (800 BCE) is shown in solid yellow, the area of influence by 500 BCE (HaD) in light yellow. The core territory of the La Tène culture (450 BCE) is shown in solid green, the eventual area of La Tène influence by 50 BCE in light green. The territories of some major Celtic tribes are labelled.

On the linguistic classification of Venetic

[...]

Conclusion:

By analyzing critically the arguments proposed for the classification of Northern Adriatic Venetic,
this study has reached the conclusion about its significant Celticity. The basis for this
statement is provided by the morphological inventory and the functional distribution of the
morphological elements. As to the phonology, areal phenomena have been observed in the
similarities between Northern Adriatic Venetic and the neighbouring Italic. This confirms the
increasing awareness among Celtic specialists (e.g. Sims-Williams 2007) that the classificatory
parameters for Celticity are not as clear-cut as traditionally assumed. Our analysis has reached
exactly this conclusion concerning areal phenomena shared between Venetic and Italic with the
result that Northern Adriatic Venetic occupies an intermediate position on the traditional classificatory
parameters, but belongs to the Celtic type on the basis of the phonological patterning
(including lenition in the consonant system based on the tense vs, lax opposition). This fact, combined
with morphology which can be identified as Celtic, leads to the conclusion that Northern
Adriatic Venetic was a variety of Celtic which was subject to areal common developments with
Italic in the phonology and the lexicon, but remained entirely Celtic in the grammar.

The present investigation of East European Venetic has shown that its conjectured phonological
type fits the phonological type of both Northern Adriatic Venetic and — even more
so — of Vannetais as a surviving variety of Armorican Venetic. The Armorican Vannetais,
originally surrounded by Celtic, has never raised any doubt about its Celticity. The fundamental
similarity of Northern Adriatic Venetic, the conjectured East European Venetic and of
Vannetais on the level of the phonological type, and the specific similarity of both of the latter
varieties in the realm of palatalization combined with asymmetrical lenition, enable the conclusion
that these were genetically related varieties of Venetic within the realm of Celtic that
later became differentiated due to areal phenomena.

http://www.jolr.ru/files/%2883%29jlr...2833-46%29.pdf

[Vesuvian Sky]

hmmmmm, interesting so this new study by Jadranka Gvozdanović (2012) is stepping out and saying Venetic is definitely a Celtic IE language.

As we all know, Venetic's position has been debated for a while. Mallory (1989) refers to it as the language of the Iron Age Este culture:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Este_culture

This culture is also in close proximity to Golascece culture which appears to have had cultural strata's in its territory stemming from both Urnfield and Halstatt cultures. Golascece culture also has the Lepontic script, which linguists have regarded as Celtic for many years now.

I haven't seen too many lexical presentations of Venetic to compare with say the language of Pre-Roman Gaul or the Lepontic script but it seems the connections now have been made. The archaeology of the NE Italy shows a plate of warriors too that is regarded as displaying the "Venetic fighting system" which consisted of 3 types of pikemen and axemen to finish the job:

[Smaug]

Interesting, thank you for answering! Yes indeed, in this study they basically state that Venetic was a Celtic language, what would make sense given the Gaullish presence in Cisalpine Gaul. What is not very clear for me is if Venetics were a different Celtic people or if they were a non-Celtic Celtified population like the Celts in Britian for example, who are also Celtified pre-Celts.

It could be either:

Celtic peoples started to penetrate Veneto around 600 BC, and they invaded it completely in the fourth century, during the Gallic invasion that reached Rome. Celtic peoples destabilized the whole of central and northern Italy. Veneto also showed signs of this generalised crisis caused by the Celts, who clearly settled there in the second half of the Iron Age. Ancient sources mention some of them, such as the Cenomans, who settled in West Veneto. The territory which extends from Padova to Vicenza, was a nucleon that tried to resist and preserve its autochthony through a constant use of the arms. In any case, beyond taking into account either conflicts between the two parts or processes of integration. It is certain that the diffused presence of the Celts in Transpadana starting in 400 BC affected the Veneto peoples’ life style so that Polybius, in the second century BC, could point them out as completely similar to them except for the language.

http://www.archeoveneto.it/portale/?...d=1701&lang=en

Or:

According to Italian scholars, it is incorrect to think the question of the Celtic presence in Northern Italy in terms of invasions. It is increasingly evident that the presence of Celts in northern Italy dates prior to the waves of invaders described in classical sources, and that subalpine Italy was involved "in its very own primary process of the ethno-linguistic definition of the Celtic nation" (Pallottino).

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Massimo_Pallottino

[Vesuvian Sky]

Interesting, thank you for answering! Yes indeed, in this study they basically state that Venetic was a Celtic language, what would make sense given the Gaullish presence in Cisalpine Gaul. What is not very clear for me is if Venetics were a different Celtic people or if they were a non-Celtic Celtified population like the Celts in Britian for example, who are also Celtified pre-Celts.

Ah. Classic question in regards to archaeology/prehistoric demographic processes and one that is a near and dear to my heart. Some relevant issues/questions here:

1) Where exactly was the Celtic homeland or perhaps the more appropriate question is where and when does the proto-Celtic language develop?

Many prehistorians suggest Bell Beaker culture = proto-Celtic but the subsequent Celtic cultures from that point on were very different in terms of material remains and the Celt-Iberians, like the Venetic warriors, had a different material culture then what is classically thought of as "Celtic" (trouser wearing, certain types of swords, certain physicial types regarding skeletal remains). Hence, tracking Celtic migrations from the theoretical proto-Celtic Bell Beaker cultural horizon is quite vexing.

Consider the Halstatt scabbard for instance:



Now check out a depiction of Celt-Iberian warriors:


Now compare all these historically known Celtic cultures to the Venetic warrior depictions.

Pretty different material cultures each reflecting regional differences arising for different clothing needs. Also Celt-Iberians used the falcatta while the Halstatt people used straight flat swords:





Despite not sharing the same material culture, all these people had languages that were apparently very similar.

2. How do languages spread?

Some who are against invasive ideas for language spread will evoke the theory of convergence to explain while a new language comes from somewhere else but I think such a theory is mostly non-sense.

Usually, there is always a migratory or invasive element for why a new language is spoken in an area.

[Smaug]

Yes, actually I am afraid of being biased because as you know I have a thing for Celtic cutures, as you said very well, we always go for what is closer and dear to our hearts. The Venetic fighting system seems similar to the Celtiberian system, both with its differences of course. When we look at the maps of the exapansion of Hallstatt and La Tenè cultures, Veneto is included:





R1b is present in Central and Western parts of Veneto at the same frequency of other Nothern Italian regions, and we all know R1b is associated with the Celtic spread. Some claim the Veneti were also R1b whiles others associate the Veneti with I2a2:



So the presence of R1b in Veneto could come from intermarriage with the Gaullish Boii. Now my question is, you as the gentleman and scholar thay I know you are, what do you think? Were the Veneti Celtic, were them Celtified by admixture with the Boii Gauls, or they had no Celticity at all?

[Vesuvian Sky]

So the presence of R1b in Veneto could come from intermarriage with the Gaullish Boii. Now my question is, you as the gentleman and scholar thay I know you are, what do you think? Were the Veneti Celtic, were them Celtified by admixture with the Boii Gauls, or they had no Celticity at all?

To be or not to R1B my dear Uhtred. That is the question!

I too once dabbled in the dark arts of people, genes, anad languages in regards to spatial distribution and the distribution of HG R1b certainly makes a tempting case for postulating the spread of Celtic languages with this paternal line.

But!

R1B is a HG most tricky in nature. Why? Because different clades of R1B suggest different demographic processes. Some may be older in Europe then others. Some may be Neolithic invaders. Some may have spread with Celtic Bronze/Iron Age migrations.

Interestingly enough, the Bell Beaker culture site in Germany did indeed have males from Y-DNA R1B as determined by aDNA extraction. Unfortunately we do not have higher resolution analysis available at the moment to determine specific clades.

But!

There's always progress.

Without going into a deep analysis/convulted discussion regarding R1B clades I'll say this much regarding Celtic migrations:

They definitely happened in Italy but figuring out whic specific clades of R1B were the contributors will require deeper analytical methods.

To answer specifically the question regarding were the Veneti Celtic in nature, well that's more of a linguistic quesiton in this regards

but!

I have an off the cuff internet forum solution!

Let's compile Lepontic script (definitely Celtic in N. Italy c. 6th century BC) and compare to Ventic. I know a good source for Lepontic but not so sure for Venetic at the moment.

[Anthropologique]

Actually in Western Iberia a form of quilt, rather similar to what is worn in the British Isles, Brittany and Galicia / N. Portugal (Gallaecia) today, was used by Celtic warriors. Some tribes also used plaid or checkered pants. At apex, 70% of Iberia was Celtic.

[Anthropologique]

I suspect the Veneti were Celtic influenced.

[Smaug]

To be or not to R1B my dear Uhtred. That is the question!

I too once dabbled in the dark arts of people, genes, anad languages in regards to spatial distribution and the distribution of HG R1b certainly makes a tempting case for postulating the spread of Celtic languages with this paternal line.

But!

R1B is a HG most tricky in nature. Why? Because different clades of R1B suggest different demographic processes. Some may be older in Europe then others. Some may be Neolithic invaders. Some may have spread with Celtic Bronze/Iron Age migrations.

Interestingly enough, the Bell Beaker culture site in Germany did indeed have males from Y-DNA R1B as determined by aDNA extraction. Unfortunately we do not have higher resolution analysis available at the moment to determine specific clades.

But!

There's always progress.

Without going into a deep analysis/convulted discussion regarding R1B clades I'll say this much regarding Celtic migrations:

They definitely happened in Italy but figuring out whic specific clades of R1B were the contributors will require deeper analytical methods.

To answer specifically the question regarding were the Veneti Celtic in nature, well that's more of a linguistic quesiton in this regards

but!

I have an off the cuff internet forum solution!

Let's compile Lepontic script (definitely Celtic in N. Italy c. 6th century BC) and compare to Ventic. I know a good source for Lepontic but not so sure for Venetic at the moment.

R1b is divided in many subclades, each representing one heritage. Unfortunately I couldn't find a map of the R1b present in Italy. As for the Lepontic script:

Lepontic is known from around 140 inscriptions written in the alphabet of Lugano, one of five main Northern Italic alphabets derived from the Etruscan alphabet. Similar scripts were used for writing the Rhaetic and Venetic languages and the Germanic runic alphabets probably derive from a script belonging to this group.

Venetic:

A sample inscription in Venetic, found on a bronze nail at Este (Es 45):

Venetic: Mego donasto śainatei Reitiiai porai Egeotora Aimoi ke louderobos
Latin (literal): me donavit sanatrici Reitiae bonae Egetora [pro] Aemo liberis-que
English: Egetora gave me to Good Reitia the Healer on behalf of Aemus and the children

Another inscription, found on a situla (vessel such as an urn or bucket) at Cadore (Ca 4 Valle):

Venetic: eik Goltanos doto louderai Kanei
Latin (literal): hoc Goltanus dedit liberae Cani
English: Goltanus sacrificed this for the virgin Kanis

Lepontic Script:



Venetic Script:

[Vesuvian Sky]

As for the Lepontic script:

The alphabets are certainly similar.

Here are some Lepontic words:

atos: borders
artaus: gravestones
eri-bogio:strong fighter
iknos: son of
karite: construct
kelhx: erect, raise
koneu: community?

There are many more examples here:
http://www.univie.ac.at/lexlep/index...from=katacinas

Most seem to be names of things though.

We'll have to compare some to Venetic as well.