from adriatic Veneti there was middle age Venetian republic...
they were earlier wave and were latinized and had different language than later waves of Veneti...
also from Veneti comes name Wends, which is alternative name of Sorbs
So, Sorbs still have that name, and till recently it was the name by which Germans were talking about all Slavs...
worth mentioning is that Serbs and Croats, while together might go under Sarmatians have their own ancient names... there are other I2 Sarmatians besides them... and Veneti might be one of them...
clue to that is that Vistula Veneti are first mentioned in history as Sarmatian Venedi who settled in Germania..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vistula_Veneti
tribes keep their names, but their language and culture can change
they also assimilate conquered tribes which can alter somewhat their genetical imprint...
Adriatic Veneti arrived to Europe before Vistula Veneti, and were latinized...their language and culture became alike other italics...
Vistula Veneti first were germanized than slavicized..
such changes of languages and culture are possible just by living next to some tribes since IE languages in distant past didnot differ as much as now
IE languages origin from iran where they were already spoken by haplogroups I, R1a, R1b, probably G2a as well... in fact more distant is language from the one spoken in Iran, more distant in time was the settlement of people carrying that language...
e.g. Slavic is most similar to iranian languages and is thus more recent cultural and linguistic wave... however there is R1a in Europe much older than that wave...
I am trying to solve puzzle by gathering pieces...if you have better clues you should share them and not just point out how you know better...
good link, very informative (if correct)
it shows that everywhere north of proto-Slavic was layer of Balts, and north of them layer of Fines, while south of them were Goths and Sarmatians,,,interestingly Sarmatians between Visigoths and Ostrogoths...
incorrect, arrival of Huns has no direct connection with I2a1 going to Sardinia...nor did they really depopulate large areas...
in fact, Roman empire was crumbling, and Suebs, Alans and Vandals used opportunity to conquer Iberian peninsula...
The Suebic, Alan and Vandal kingdoms in Gallaecia in Iberian peninsula were established around year 410, while Huns reach Panonia only around 400 and it takes decades to spread their kingdom far away into central and north Europe..
movements of people did last for some years...
So, in fact it was opposite from what you claim..Suebs,Alans and Vandals did not move cause they were afraid of Huns, but movement of Suebs, Vandals and Alans created lot of space in central Europe and allowed Huns to easily enter and create big empire...
some of I2a1 came to Sardinia only when Vandals were pushed out of Iberian peninsula by Visigoths which was much later...other I2a1 might have been there from ancient settlement waves that in fact gave name Sardinia similar to names of other carriers of haplogroup I (Suebi, Swedes, Sarbans, Serbs..)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huns
As you can see, subjected tribes were not rounded off, but became vasals that joined them in future conquests... that is how Hun empire spread until number of Huns in it became too little to maintain in charge of it...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huns
Preserved words of Huns have resemblance to Slavic and not to Turkic...
Huns might have been just another iranian tribe, as they are first recorded in area of Sarmatians...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Huns
Trajectory of Huns clearly indicates they have focused on attacking Roman empire and not on killing half of north Europe as you imagine... in fact, subjugated tribes typically joined them in further conquers... why on earth would they kill all potential sources of their soldiers and completely vacate most of north Europe as you envision...
Huns were tribal union, they would include subjugated tribes in it...
This is correct, e.g. Goths settled east Balkan and Gepids Panonia..
In Serbia additional source of I1 can be that Serbs came to Serbia from white Serbia that is most likely area of east Germany where Sorbs still carry the name of tribal union that was established there... there Serbs might have assimilated some I1 tribes...
you make many assumptions here......
you claim Venedes to be R1a and Sclavines to be R1a+I2a2 while I think it was in fact opposite...
no, they actually entered Panonia from Romania...
Bizantium bought them off, so they stopped attacking Byzantium and started a spread towards north...all the way to Baltic, than Byzantium used them against Slavs in Scythia minor...when they established empire (tribal union in which Slavic was lingua franca) helped by Byzantium, they turned against Byzantium...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eurasian_Avars
yes, because now Byzantium was weakened by attacks of Avars
yes, that's correct... but in fact kingdom of Ostrogoths was major cause of movement of E-V13 from Dalmatia and Bosnia deeper into Byzantium
compare Ostrogoth kingdom with spread of frequence and variance of E-V13 and you will see it clearly
Croats are mix of slavicized I2a2 Croats, R1a from Iran, from Slavs and previous R1a waves in Europe, I1 from Goths, R1b from Celts...
Serbs are mix of slavicized I2a2 Serbs, E-V13 from previous inhabitants, some R1a from iran, Slavs and previous R1a waves, I1 from Goths, some assimilated in east Germany and some perhaps was carried from their iranian homeland...
where exactly are those issues strongly contradicting things that I have stated, and where can you exactly claim that my assumptions are wrong and your correct?
main difference seems that you assume Veneti as R1a, and Sclavenoi as R1a and I2a2, while I believe it was opposite...
the reason I belive opposite is that we find I2a1 on place of ancient Veneti in Britanny, because we find I2a2 in north Italy where Adriatic Veneti lived...
Additional reason for my assumption is that Veneti are recorded in early history as Sarmatian tribe... than later as Germanic one, and in the very end as Slavic one... as I have already pinpointed haplogroup I1 is related to Germanic tribes and I2 dominantly to Serbs/Croat related Sarmatian tribes... some of I2 was merged in germanic tribes upon initial settlement of Sarmatian Veneti (and probably Vandals as well) in Germany...
right..
but you made more assumptions than me and did not try to relate your assumptions to genetics and tribal name continuity...
those are proto-Slavs...
but in 4th century R1a and I2a2 were already mixed and most Srmatians already slavicized (which is normal since for iranian tribes from late waves, Slavic was by far most similar language)
As I explained, I2 in Britain might be related to Veneti who lived in Britanny...this Veneti have arrived in previous wave of settlement... they were celticized with spread of La Tenne culture... reason to propose Veneti as source of I2 is that their historically attested location corresponds well to spread of M26 in Britanny.... similarly we have places with historically atteded Veneti name coupled with I2 north of Adriatic and around Vistula... for me this is clear indication of possible happenings...