Question for the Keltoi experts.

[cmacq]

Sorry, I see there have been additions, which I need to read. I may have to edit this?

I'm pretty sure the Veneti are considered IE by the scientific world. However they probably aren't closr related to the Celts than other IE's were.

Scientific world? If one implies archaeology, historiography, and linguistics, I fear very thin on science and much more subjective than objective. Nonetheless, I believe upon occasion I’ve been accused of being part of this so-called scientific world.

Right, only to clarify, I understood what both Moros and Power2the1 wrote, adding that if they (the Veneti) were indeed IE, one may (or must?) entertain the possibility that all three Veneti groups were related, and if so this association would most likely have been forged in the LBA (Late Bronze Age), as this was a period of significant demographic movement (and in theory represent one aspect of the motivation for significant differentiation of the Centum [which I am not proposing]). Indeed, influence by the Celts, yet given the above proposal, it’s important to note that the (Celt) ethnogenesis occurred much later in the EIA (Early [European or Pre-Roman] Iron Age) and (Celt) expansion later still, I believe in the late 5th or early 4th centuries BC. Thus, Celt expansion, assimilation, and influence may possibly further promote the perception that the Polish, Gallic, and Italian Veneti were discrete.

On the other hand, if these Veneti were not IE, there is no need to explore such a proposal.

Hope this clarifies my intent, and may I add this has been thankfully rather tame, for as I said, this subject could quickly turn into a huge can of worms, when proponents for the main actors decide to weight in.

CmacQ