Re: was The Finnic issue

From: george knysh
Message: 67816
Date: 2011-06-20



From: Torsten <tgpedersen@...>
To: cybalist@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, June 20, 2011 11:19 AM
Subject: [tied] Re: <Venta> was The Finnic issue

 
--- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "gknysh" <gknysh@...> wrote:
>
>
>
> --- In cybalist@yahoogroups.com, "The Egyptian Chronicles" <the_egyptian_chronicles@> wrote:
> >
> > DGK wrote: I see no basis for Wikipedia's claim that <Venta> meant 'market', and Kitson's theory of extraction from suffixed names is implausible. But if the Belgae conquered the three towns named Venta from the Veneti, perhaps the original name was *Wenetja:, and this became in Belgic *Wentt(j)a with regular syncope and /j/-gemination (a feature later occurring in NWB-influenced West Germanic).
>
> GK: Only one of the three Ventas is connected to the Belgae. The others are Venta Icenorum and Venta Silurum. Looks like the poor Veneti got it from everybody (:=)). But seriously, I think the link to the discussion mentioned by Brian Scott is useful, and the notion that "venta" was a borrowing into Celtic worthy of further study. On the Venet/Vened problem cf. also ch. 3 here: http://books.google.com/books?id=5aoId7nA4bsC&pg=PA87&dq#v=onepage&q&f=false

Bojtár, as a Continental, has got it wrong on one point: Coast people like the Veneti don't wander, they sail.
****GK: I've only read parts of this (not yet registered as a googlite(:=)) Bojtar seems to have borrowed his map from Labuda (also a Continental though). What I like about this is the statement that the only evidence remaining about the original Venets/Veneds is their name, scattered all over the place.****
 
Forget about all the arrows showing putative wanderings, whatever migrating they did was by their beloved ships, and it wasn't a one-way trip either. Those coastal and riverine communities must have had trade going on between them, in the style of the later
 
****GK: One of the first things to do (and even that isn't easy) is to disentangle the various Venet/Vened place names et sim. It seems pretty clear to me (but discussion welcome) that for the Germanics the term Vened et sim. played a role similar to that of "Volcae". There were historical times when it applied to Slavs (and not to seafaring ones either). In that sense it seems to have been borrowed by Tacitus. Perhaps some of the Vened placenames in Germania refer to Slavs, esp. those close to the settlement areas of the 6th c. I think a case can also  be made (and has been made) for Veneds as standing for the Germanics' earlier eastern neighbours (the Lusatians and Pomeranians) /whence it was later reapplied to Slavs, much like "Volcae" et sim later stood for a variety of populations/. On the other hand, it  seems very arguable that at some time "Vened"  stood for (at least) primarily "coastal  communities". Ptolemy is a good source for such usage. Then we have to figure out how this term came to be applied as an ethnonym to both a Celtic and an Italic group (both coastal).
What is your view of the Livonian "Venden"?  Cf.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vends
 
I've looked at the Livonian Chronicle. It mentions the following facts about them:
(1) They were the original inhabitants of the river Venta in today's Latvia.
(2) They were chased away from there by the Curonians (a Baltic tribe)
(3) After this they resided for a time in the location where Riga was later founded.
(4) The Curonians attacked them again, massacred a whole bunch, and the remaining Vends moved further east and settled among the Letts, with whom they had peaceful coexistence.
(5) They were christianized in 1207, and established good relations with the Livonian Knights of the Sword, who erected a castle on the location of an earlier Vendic settlement.
(6) They existed as a distinct community for another 400 years.
 
All we can say is that events (1) through (4) occurred before 1184 (when the Livonian Chronicle begins).
Also, these Vends do not appear to be either Baltic nor Finnic (they did not wish to blend in with the Livs and were distincts from the Letts among which they settled).
One issue about them: were they named after the river or was the river named after them?
Another: How much earlier than 1184 did events (1) through (3) occur? It would help if we could estimate the Curonian landnahme. *****