This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I moved it here, so that someone could make sense from this (although now I think it would be hardly possible).
I also added "see also" for Venedes article, which seems to address the same issue. mikka (t) 19:35, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
http://www.veneti.info/en HAVE A LOOK —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.212.165.43 ( talk) 18:59, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
The anon text is, I think, referring to the theory that the Veneti were a Slavic people related to the Slovenes (now mainly in Slovenia). The dual grammatical number alledgedly used by the Veneti is indeed also fully employed in Slovenian grammar. The theory is more fully described in the website for the Institute for Slovenian Studies of Victoria, Australia, but I cannot otherwise vouch for its academic respectability. A readable description of the theory would probably not be completely out of place in this section. However, I can imagine it might come with some nationalistic political baggage. The "see also" link for Venedes mentioned by mikka above would seem to be appropriate, however I note that it has already been removed. ralphb 129.129.152.74 16:19, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Euganeo
05:15, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
NOTE: Please read my post as carefully as possible as I have made every attempt to reference all my material and to provide any relevant links within Wikipedia. I am an anonymous academic (due to the main reason that in the past I have been vilified by nationalists and fascists for my criticism of their elitist and racist attitudes).
The theory put forth by user:195.210.245.211 is a complete mess. It is good to see that moderators are cleaning up these politically charged pseudohistorical entries on Wiki. As for the so-called "Institute for Slovenian Studies of Victoria" it is really just another site that links to a pro-Slovenian nationalistic group involved in the publication of a number of books purporting the strange (and heavily flawed) theory of the Veneti being ancient Slavs of some sort. It is disregarded by the academic community. Anyone wanting a genuine assessment of current theories on the Venetic language and people can read an article by Rex Wallace from the University of Massachusetts Amherst which was published in the 2004 book: Roger D. Woodard (ed.), Encyclopedia of the World’s Ancient Languages, pp. 840–856. It is the official (and most recent) publication accepted by established academia on ancient languages and was produced by the University of Cambridge.
The word Veneti comes from the Ancient Greek word Enetoi which is present in a number of texts by ancient authors including Homer and Strabo. Indeed the Modern Greek language pronounced ]OI (or omega and iota) as an I but not in all cases with Ancient Greek, however that is another matter. The Enetoi were a tribe of Paphlagonians who, according to legend (and the ancient texts), left after the Trojan War to settle in North-eastern Italy in the modern Veneto region. Xenophon in his text Anabasis (Xenophon) (known as Anabasis III in the Loeb Classical Library edition) also makes reference to the Paphlagonians from Asia Minor.
As for the dual grammatical number allegedly used by the Veneti, it was also used by the Ancient Greeks from whom the Veneti absorbed a reasonable amount of culture and lexiconographic influence. The fact that Slovenian also utilises the dual grammatical number is about as relevant in this context as the fact that Arabic, Hebrew, Old English and Old Russian do also, see: dual grammatical number for further details.
For further refereces, the head of Pre-Roman Archaeological Studies at the University of Padua in Italy, Dr. Loredana Calzavara-Capuis has published over 72 articles and books on the ancient Veneti being the Italic peoples we know them to have been.
See: http://www.istitutoveneto.it/iv/presentazione/soci/biografia_socio.php?id=252
Others include: Prosdocimi, Chieco-Bianchi, Pellegrini and Lejeune (googling any of these names will provide proper references that you can research for yourself in libraries to judge the authenticity of what I am typing here).
It is of utmost importance that a resource such as the Wikipedia maintains reasonable standards in what sort of content is published. The internet has unfortunately become a haven for pseudohistorians who attempt to subvert public opinion. It is good to see moderators ensuring this.
Euganeo 05:15, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Is that you, Noam?
Euganeo 01:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC) Noam? Sorry, you must be mistaking me for someone else. You didn't sign your message though. I've registered now as Euganeo but I had previously been editing from an unregistered IP address which was on a large network at a company. Euganeo 01:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Euganeo 01:12, 29 March 2006 (UTC) Thank you TShilo12, I completely forgot that the re-directs would not necessarily go from say, Hebrew, to the "Hebrew language" which is what I intended. Thanks for the fix-up on that, I appreciate it. Euganeo 01:12, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi folks. A lot of activity on this talk page. But don't forget that the Adriatic Veneti article is a stub and needs to be expanded. Alexander 007 02:34, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Safeguarding a useful list of historical references (not all are to these Veneti; some are to other Veneti) from User_talk:Wetman#History_Wiki-troubleshooting. -- Nantonos 11:54, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Sincere apologies but that list has been deleted because it was the point of a political debate in which a number of right-wing debators attempted to expound
pseudohistorical theories upon this particular topic, the
Veneti. You will notice in the history of the discussions on
Veneti that there is much abiguity and many of the poorly constructed arguments come from those attempting to identify the Ancient
Veneti with Slavs. You will also notice that the list posted here, towards the end, became increasingly Slavicentric, to the point that the final points were written in
Cyrillic! Many of the references and poor English spelling are due to the fact that it was largely lifted from pro-nationalist Slovenian websites in no way affiliated with academia.
This same list was posted on the
Veneti page in the form of vandalism, but was immediately deleted. Please be careful of the sorts of unaccredited and
pseudohistorical writings that pop up on this topic. We do not want another disaster as we have had in the past with strange, politically motivated people posting bizarre theories with clearly immoral appropriation of the ethnic archaic identities of other cultures. As noted earlier, the Wikipedia is for the discussion and transmission of information of academic integrity that is accepted by the mainstream and concurred upon by the academia.
Euganeo
05:46, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Indo-European R1a Y chromosome haplogroup was a carrier of Slavic languages from the northern Asia to Europe. Original Slavs were N haplotype in Asia. R1a was gradually invading EE and SEE starting through Neolitic. Slavic migrations from 5th to 7th century were rather small. Stokavians came in the teritory already possesed by Slavic speaking populations of older (still existing) dialects: Kaikavians, Chakavians and Ikavians whose culture, according to the archeologists, was equivalent or nicely mixed up with culture of pre-Indo-Europeans in the area. It's really possible that a variance of pre-Slavic language was spoken in the northern Adriatic. Usage of the term "Slavs" was mostly connected to "Sclavens" of Greek writers, who were invading "Illyricum" led by Avars in 6th and 7th century. There is no proof that these Sclavens were an ethnic group. They were rather a few several different ethnic groups but probably using the same (dominant as always) language for communication. Also recently many scientists claim that old-Glagolitic alphabetics are older than Latin. 78.3.3.191 23:05, 15 July 2007 (UTC)I suggest that a link to the Ancient Scythian Culture would be worth while to explore.So many artifacts of that culture have been documented, of special interest would be the gold jewelry work,types of burial tombs constructed,if evidence exists of buckles and bridles manufactured for the nomadic horse culture.If all roads led to Rome.Veneto was the door way where east and west intermingled. Joseph
The description of File:Italie -800.JPG claims that the map is inspired on User:Dbachmann's File:Iron Age Italy.png. However the two maps are different, and neither cites the source of the information. This should be fixed... All the best, -- Jorge Stolfi ( talk) 16:19, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Someone deleted the Latin and Greek terms claiming that "they do not refer to the Adriatic veneti". However my recollection was that the classical sources cited in the article do refer to the Adriatic Veneti by those names (although some of those sources already warn about possible confusion with the Gallic Venety, due to coincidence of names). I have restored the names, pending justification for the deletion. If those ineed are the wrong L./Gr. names, then we should put the right ones instead. All the best, -- Jorge Stolfi ( talk) 16:22, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Congrats, now the Slovenian and Croatian completely biased, ridicolous, FASCIST, NATIONALIST AND JINGOIST EDITS appear EVEN on ANCIENT history. Congratulation, English Wikipedia. -- 95.251.8.69 ( talk) 09:44, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Adriatic Veneti. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:31, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
The section discusses how scholars have moved from an assumption of Illyrian origins to other views.
In an edit from 18 September 2016, 79.106.109.168 ( talk · contribs) added the following, which was later edited by users filling out the references and is offered here in its final version:
"Scholars mostly believe that Veneti were probably Illyrian, [1] [2] [3] [4] but there are some other hypothesis about their origin:"
I removed the sentence. The claim contradicts the otherwise apparently well-referenced surrounding text by restating the view that the Veneti were illyrians etc. with no attempt to incorporate it properly into the discussion. I don't know what is correct but the previous text seems more nuanced and better written, and the addition looks like a dogmatic reiteration of an 19th century view. The references are unimpressive: Gary is a non-specialist book seeminlgly repeating a traditional view in passing with no attempt at discussion (I can't see the footnote). Jacques merely references Mommsen from 1874 without any attempt to take any newer research into account. He was apparently a Protestant missionary in Albania in the 1930s who published this book in his old age, and nothing else that I can find, not a specialist in classical studies. Waldman & Mason: a wide-ranging work that just mentions the Veneti briefly in a few places. The final, misshaped link is to a book from 1841 by James Cowles Prichard, which obviously has little to say about current research. -- Hegvald ( talk) 11:32, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I moved it here, so that someone could make sense from this (although now I think it would be hardly possible).
I also added "see also" for Venedes article, which seems to address the same issue. mikka (t) 19:35, 28 October 2005 (UTC)
http://www.veneti.info/en HAVE A LOOK —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.212.165.43 ( talk) 18:59, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
The anon text is, I think, referring to the theory that the Veneti were a Slavic people related to the Slovenes (now mainly in Slovenia). The dual grammatical number alledgedly used by the Veneti is indeed also fully employed in Slovenian grammar. The theory is more fully described in the website for the Institute for Slovenian Studies of Victoria, Australia, but I cannot otherwise vouch for its academic respectability. A readable description of the theory would probably not be completely out of place in this section. However, I can imagine it might come with some nationalistic political baggage. The "see also" link for Venedes mentioned by mikka above would seem to be appropriate, however I note that it has already been removed. ralphb 129.129.152.74 16:19, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
Euganeo
05:15, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
NOTE: Please read my post as carefully as possible as I have made every attempt to reference all my material and to provide any relevant links within Wikipedia. I am an anonymous academic (due to the main reason that in the past I have been vilified by nationalists and fascists for my criticism of their elitist and racist attitudes).
The theory put forth by user:195.210.245.211 is a complete mess. It is good to see that moderators are cleaning up these politically charged pseudohistorical entries on Wiki. As for the so-called "Institute for Slovenian Studies of Victoria" it is really just another site that links to a pro-Slovenian nationalistic group involved in the publication of a number of books purporting the strange (and heavily flawed) theory of the Veneti being ancient Slavs of some sort. It is disregarded by the academic community. Anyone wanting a genuine assessment of current theories on the Venetic language and people can read an article by Rex Wallace from the University of Massachusetts Amherst which was published in the 2004 book: Roger D. Woodard (ed.), Encyclopedia of the World’s Ancient Languages, pp. 840–856. It is the official (and most recent) publication accepted by established academia on ancient languages and was produced by the University of Cambridge.
The word Veneti comes from the Ancient Greek word Enetoi which is present in a number of texts by ancient authors including Homer and Strabo. Indeed the Modern Greek language pronounced ]OI (or omega and iota) as an I but not in all cases with Ancient Greek, however that is another matter. The Enetoi were a tribe of Paphlagonians who, according to legend (and the ancient texts), left after the Trojan War to settle in North-eastern Italy in the modern Veneto region. Xenophon in his text Anabasis (Xenophon) (known as Anabasis III in the Loeb Classical Library edition) also makes reference to the Paphlagonians from Asia Minor.
As for the dual grammatical number allegedly used by the Veneti, it was also used by the Ancient Greeks from whom the Veneti absorbed a reasonable amount of culture and lexiconographic influence. The fact that Slovenian also utilises the dual grammatical number is about as relevant in this context as the fact that Arabic, Hebrew, Old English and Old Russian do also, see: dual grammatical number for further details.
For further refereces, the head of Pre-Roman Archaeological Studies at the University of Padua in Italy, Dr. Loredana Calzavara-Capuis has published over 72 articles and books on the ancient Veneti being the Italic peoples we know them to have been.
See: http://www.istitutoveneto.it/iv/presentazione/soci/biografia_socio.php?id=252
Others include: Prosdocimi, Chieco-Bianchi, Pellegrini and Lejeune (googling any of these names will provide proper references that you can research for yourself in libraries to judge the authenticity of what I am typing here).
It is of utmost importance that a resource such as the Wikipedia maintains reasonable standards in what sort of content is published. The internet has unfortunately become a haven for pseudohistorians who attempt to subvert public opinion. It is good to see moderators ensuring this.
Euganeo 05:15, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
Is that you, Noam?
Euganeo 01:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC) Noam? Sorry, you must be mistaking me for someone else. You didn't sign your message though. I've registered now as Euganeo but I had previously been editing from an unregistered IP address which was on a large network at a company. Euganeo 01:26, 20 March 2006 (UTC)
Euganeo 01:12, 29 March 2006 (UTC) Thank you TShilo12, I completely forgot that the re-directs would not necessarily go from say, Hebrew, to the "Hebrew language" which is what I intended. Thanks for the fix-up on that, I appreciate it. Euganeo 01:12, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Hi folks. A lot of activity on this talk page. But don't forget that the Adriatic Veneti article is a stub and needs to be expanded. Alexander 007 02:34, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
Safeguarding a useful list of historical references (not all are to these Veneti; some are to other Veneti) from User_talk:Wetman#History_Wiki-troubleshooting. -- Nantonos 11:54, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
Sincere apologies but that list has been deleted because it was the point of a political debate in which a number of right-wing debators attempted to expound
pseudohistorical theories upon this particular topic, the
Veneti. You will notice in the history of the discussions on
Veneti that there is much abiguity and many of the poorly constructed arguments come from those attempting to identify the Ancient
Veneti with Slavs. You will also notice that the list posted here, towards the end, became increasingly Slavicentric, to the point that the final points were written in
Cyrillic! Many of the references and poor English spelling are due to the fact that it was largely lifted from pro-nationalist Slovenian websites in no way affiliated with academia.
This same list was posted on the
Veneti page in the form of vandalism, but was immediately deleted. Please be careful of the sorts of unaccredited and
pseudohistorical writings that pop up on this topic. We do not want another disaster as we have had in the past with strange, politically motivated people posting bizarre theories with clearly immoral appropriation of the ethnic archaic identities of other cultures. As noted earlier, the Wikipedia is for the discussion and transmission of information of academic integrity that is accepted by the mainstream and concurred upon by the academia.
Euganeo
05:46, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
Indo-European R1a Y chromosome haplogroup was a carrier of Slavic languages from the northern Asia to Europe. Original Slavs were N haplotype in Asia. R1a was gradually invading EE and SEE starting through Neolitic. Slavic migrations from 5th to 7th century were rather small. Stokavians came in the teritory already possesed by Slavic speaking populations of older (still existing) dialects: Kaikavians, Chakavians and Ikavians whose culture, according to the archeologists, was equivalent or nicely mixed up with culture of pre-Indo-Europeans in the area. It's really possible that a variance of pre-Slavic language was spoken in the northern Adriatic. Usage of the term "Slavs" was mostly connected to "Sclavens" of Greek writers, who were invading "Illyricum" led by Avars in 6th and 7th century. There is no proof that these Sclavens were an ethnic group. They were rather a few several different ethnic groups but probably using the same (dominant as always) language for communication. Also recently many scientists claim that old-Glagolitic alphabetics are older than Latin. 78.3.3.191 23:05, 15 July 2007 (UTC)I suggest that a link to the Ancient Scythian Culture would be worth while to explore.So many artifacts of that culture have been documented, of special interest would be the gold jewelry work,types of burial tombs constructed,if evidence exists of buckles and bridles manufactured for the nomadic horse culture.If all roads led to Rome.Veneto was the door way where east and west intermingled. Joseph
The description of File:Italie -800.JPG claims that the map is inspired on User:Dbachmann's File:Iron Age Italy.png. However the two maps are different, and neither cites the source of the information. This should be fixed... All the best, -- Jorge Stolfi ( talk) 16:19, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
Someone deleted the Latin and Greek terms claiming that "they do not refer to the Adriatic veneti". However my recollection was that the classical sources cited in the article do refer to the Adriatic Veneti by those names (although some of those sources already warn about possible confusion with the Gallic Venety, due to coincidence of names). I have restored the names, pending justification for the deletion. If those ineed are the wrong L./Gr. names, then we should put the right ones instead. All the best, -- Jorge Stolfi ( talk) 16:22, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Congrats, now the Slovenian and Croatian completely biased, ridicolous, FASCIST, NATIONALIST AND JINGOIST EDITS appear EVEN on ANCIENT history. Congratulation, English Wikipedia. -- 95.251.8.69 ( talk) 09:44, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Adriatic Veneti. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 01:31, 9 December 2017 (UTC)
The section discusses how scholars have moved from an assumption of Illyrian origins to other views.
In an edit from 18 September 2016, 79.106.109.168 ( talk · contribs) added the following, which was later edited by users filling out the references and is offered here in its final version:
"Scholars mostly believe that Veneti were probably Illyrian, [1] [2] [3] [4] but there are some other hypothesis about their origin:"
I removed the sentence. The claim contradicts the otherwise apparently well-referenced surrounding text by restating the view that the Veneti were illyrians etc. with no attempt to incorporate it properly into the discussion. I don't know what is correct but the previous text seems more nuanced and better written, and the addition looks like a dogmatic reiteration of an 19th century view. The references are unimpressive: Gary is a non-specialist book seeminlgly repeating a traditional view in passing with no attempt at discussion (I can't see the footnote). Jacques merely references Mommsen from 1874 without any attempt to take any newer research into account. He was apparently a Protestant missionary in Albania in the 1930s who published this book in his old age, and nothing else that I can find, not a specialist in classical studies. Waldman & Mason: a wide-ranging work that just mentions the Veneti briefly in a few places. The final, misshaped link is to a book from 1841 by James Cowles Prichard, which obviously has little to say about current research. -- Hegvald ( talk) 11:32, 16 June 2018 (UTC)