Talk:List of ancient Celtic peoples and tribes

2219:

relationship to their migration west and possible resettlement into the British isles. Because the celts were a migratory people and didn't simply spring up in these lands, the evidence shows more than trade and relatively few wars, especially linguistically and militaristically, but perhaps that does not belong here. As for Medes, there was a large celtic presence in the Medes army. These were the Anatolian Celts. I will add sources to the page. I am happy for the section to be re-named or enlarged, perhaps contemporaries of the Celtic peoples, in actual fact there wouldn't be that many withing local boundaries.

2018: 1997: 466: 445: 2188:

about the tribes which lived within the political borders of the republic of ...This i have reverted, and i intend to revert more if there is no dispute in 48 hours. This is intended to be a list for easy access surely? Which tribes lived in Spain, ireland..etc. Unfortunately the celts did not respect modern day political boundaries, and we cannot impose them upon history. Further adding Continents and nations which contained no celtic nations is not only ludicrous but factually wrong; yes it's a shame, but we can't all have a celt!

2890:

Forebears/Contemporaries" - their were Celts! And do not agree with the statement "The people living in the Iberian peninsula live don the edge of the Celtic world and although Gallic influence culture penetrated in the north there was a distinct and seperate culture throughout much of Spain and Portugal until Roman Expansion and conquest." - I believe it can be better sated. I can also try to find better maps, but it may take a while. Should we let the previous one there meanwhile?

1701: 1680: 2459:, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee, Center for Celtic Studies, 2005.) - please read it before going back to your archaic view that there were not Celts in Iberia. I am reverting you, given also the fact that my edit did not erase any of the info previously presented, I even added some images, and expanded the list of tribes in Iberia, with their respective links, and sourceded it (with a reference of the Journal of Interdisciplinary Celtic Studies and a 2369:) of Gaul described by Caesar have a stratified social structure (class system) which is typical of chieftoms, proto-states, or even in the most advanced cases full states. Wikipedians tend to base their edits on older reference works, particularly public domain ones on the internet, but it seems to me that in recent years there's a move away from the term "tribe" among scholars. A. R. Birley, introducing his 1999 translation of Tacitus's 990: 796: 969: 775: 256: 1319: 806: 235: 1095: 2610: 1074: 586: 1519: 1309: 1498: 1288: 565: 1608: 1711: 1587: 1105: 1204: 1183: 596: 901: 880: 204: 691: 670: 1214: 1414: 2248:

the Romans are not Romans; similarly heavy influence from the Phoceans of Massalia, the Ligurians, and the Etruscans would mean the Gauls are not Gauls... cultures influenced each other substantially at all periods in history. There was much trade and travel. I can't see why the Celtiberians are down there in the 'not really celtic' section along with the Medes and the Dacians... --

1393: 1000: 2478:

they have their own sub grouping but do not appear in the "list of Celtic peoples". The celts that were in Iberia, being covered by the list of Gallic celts, or Celtiberians, make the need for a new section irrelevant. If you wish to begin a revert war, and seek a third party juridiction, ok. It is not about the "evidence", it is merely about the necessary format of the article.

701: 1424: 2876:

sterotypical from someone who doesn't know my views. I apologiese for acalling you bias. Thank you for making the edits. Is it possible to find a better map of the British isles and Gaul than the ones that were formerly used, perhaps like The Iberian one, which is easy to read? I am not good at inserting images otherwise i would try. Thanks

326: 2875:

No, no not your former version, the one now, if it suits both parties. Because the information on other contemporaries is there, but some other information for the reader I see as a compromise. In future, please do not use terms like "british point of view"; it is unecessarily inflammatory and highly

2433:

I tried to include the recent edits and put links in. But just putting "Gaul-Belguim" in next to certain tribes which already had a different placing i didnt understand, that space i think was intended for where the tribe wass from, and it already stated they weren't? If you could elabortae with some

2327:

I deleted the link from the top in the first place, because it already existed at the bottom, which is generally where links are located. I have no problem with the same information on the tribes of gaul page being repeated on here, but not to simply ignore them. I don't think whether this started as

2247:

I see this text: The Ibero-Celts were most certainly Celts, but heavy influence, firstly from the Iberian Almerian civilisations, then Carthage means they probably should belong to a separate sub-group. In the same logic, heavy influence on the Romans from the Greeks and the Etruscans would mean that

2093:

One point feels me a little nervous, it's, all these names only in Latin. ("ii", often = "wi") Nobody could find and write the name in the true Celtic language? For us, in ARMORICA (but ARMORICA is not a good name to call about KERNEV, the CORNWALL of SOUTH, or CYMRU of SOUTH). Anyway the name should

2187:

I now believe this useful article name "List of Celtic Tribes", has been edited into a less particularly useful, perhaps nationalist and factional article. Headings such as "" which then do not go on to list any Celtic tribes, a single heading of as a seperate heading to the tribes within , an edit

2198:

Havent deleted anything, but made some cahnges, links, changed alot...might actually be just for my benefit as nobody sems to care! lalala....Added a few peoples who should be classed as celtic sub group, and put some into the sub-group who shoup who should be there, though I'm a bit confused about

2491:

were not Celtic! But a great number of the populations of Iberia were not Iberians in the ethnic-cultural sense! Do not confuse them! And the celts in Iberia are not just covered by the Gallic celts or Celtiberians. An article like this is supposed to list all the celtic tribes - that is what I am

2208:

I do not understand why Scythia and Dacia are included in the list described by ambiguous words "These peoples are believed to have strong Celtic associations, though not thoroughly proven to be Celts". They were not the Celts, though there were wars (and trade) between them and the Celts. But the

2967:

Ciriii gave the requested clarification. Focusing on process, they requested The Ogre do something differently, explained why the previous action did not work well, and apologized for something Ciriii did previously. Ciriii thanked The Ogre for their contribution and requested help from The Ogre

2477:

I don't know what a British isles point of view is, but clearly yours is a biased one. The article works on the assumption of "people" not political borders, we have had this argument again and again. The iberians were not celtic, but iberian. A distinct and seperate ethnic grouping, which is why

2258:

The Celtiberians are recognised as Forebears of a celtic civilisation in Hispania, at least this is one theory. Is the link for Celtiberian not to that appropriate page which explains this, i will check, if not please adjust. Also, i am putting the Gallic tribes back, it is all very well having a

2218:

No you are right and i would be happy for the wording to be arranged. There are several differing theories theories that the "Celts" (in the very broadest sense of the word) were originally inhabitants or the same people as the Dacians or Scythii. With the Scythii there has been much work done in

1887:

the same in all regions, and should be sublisted separately in each region: intermunicipal entities are sometimes larger and split by subregions (e.g. the Metropolitan Area of Lisbon has two subregions), some intercommunal entities are containing only parts of subregions. All subregions should be

2976:

You have stated your points clearly, explained your intentions, used direct quotes, collaboratively edited compromise text, requested and given clarification, evaluated and addressed the process, explained what did not work well and what to do differently, apologized to each other, thanked each

2386:

on BBC2 last night and he savaged Roman historians for their dismissive and condescending attitude towards the Celts, but it seems to me that Caesar and Tacitus look down on the Gauls and Britons less than most modern historians, and in many ways it's the choice of the word "tribe" to translate

2448:

Hello Ciriii. I see that you have reverted my inclusion of the Celtic populations of Iberia. You state that "early people of Iberia were not definitely Celt". Well... My friend, you are contradicting present knowledge on Celtic Iberia, as can be seen in the reference I've placed in the article

2418:

Will people please stop nationalising this page. It is highly inappropriate. Like removing Portugal from Celtiberians; they inhabited northern Portugal, and the wikipedia page states so. Or removing Croatia from the Scordisci, their range incompassed this; also stated in wikipedia itself, and

3578:

it repeats itself a lot, and the tone feels off. i also feel like it goes into completely irrelevant tangents, such as with the Nazi mentions. sometimes it sounds like the author does not trust the reader's intelligence, and there are many typos. but there is some good content within as well.

3061:

Were the Ruteni related to any Slavic peoples (former Yugoslavia) from across the Adriatic sea? The Roman Empire took over Celtic and non-Indo-European lands like the Etruscans. If they were still Celtic people, the Ruteni would have a relationship with the so-called Ruthenians in present-day

2377:

for Oxford World's Classics, says "I have avoided the word 'tribe' to describe the native peoples or states of Britain and Germany... 'Tribe' is, I think, a misleading expression... Instead I have used terms such as 'state(s)', 'people(s)', 'community', occasionally 'nation', according to the

2889:

I did not intend to offend you, sorry if that happened. I still have some issues regarding this version. What do you mean by "information on other contemporaries is there, but some other information for the reader I see as a compromise."? As I said, I still desagree withe the heading "Celtic

2295:

No, please don't put the small poor list 'back'. It didn't list all the tribes before (clearly this page started as a list of British celtic tribes and has grown by adding a selection of others). You could put a copy of the main Gaulish list, but would you then ensure it is kept up to date?

3175:

There are several tribes named Belgae and Boii (or spelled Boi, Boui and Voii) in continental Europe and the British Isles. There are also many tribes named Gal- like the Galatians in Asia Minor (Turkey) and we're not sure there's a relation with the Galilee in the Holy Land in biblical

2316:

Yes, this is a list of CELTIC TRIBES, and should include the ones of Gaul also, not just a redirect to another page, which should be placed at the bottom. instead of removing them and redirecting to a different page, please improve the list since you clearly have the knowledge to do

2971:

The Ogre apologized for what had not worked well. Then they asked for another clarification of wording, stated a couple of disagreements (with direct quotes), and suggested a rewording. They agreed to search for a map, and requested agreement to keep the current map in the

2209:

same would be true for Greeks and Germanic tribes. I do not think that all peoples who fighted (or traded with) the Celts should be listed here. And I do not know ANY "strong Celtic associations" of Medes. I would be happy to know the opinion of other editors.

3160:

The tribes named are definitely Celtic and there are many reliable references for this. I will be adding citations for all the tribes you questioned. Please try to be specific instead of changing the whole meaning of the page by inserting "mostly" in front of

2402:

Your point is very valid, tribe is often misleading. Though I think it is also appropriate in some instances. Although tribes is still probably what most people would refer to as a celtic social structure, i believe "celtic peoples" would be more appropriate.

2806:

The origins of the Celtiberians might provide a key to unlocking the Celticization process in the rest of the Peninsula. The process of celticization of the SW by the Keltoi and NW is however not a simple celtiberian question. Recent investigation about the

166: 2419:

despite your own opinions, it is necessary merely for a consensus, and because it is a viewpoint. Removing things like that is essentially nationalism, iunless you explain why....and present your views and an opposite and valid point??

2094:

be write in old CYMRIC language, for the tribes from the CYMRIC branch, and in Old GAELIC, for the branch from EIRE and ERSE (scotland); with the meaning of the name of tribes, because these names of Tribes means always something.

3057:

Ruteni were mentioned by Caesar, but are not on the list? Why? They were significant contributors (foederati) to the Roman army, although one part was on the Vercingetorix's side against Romans. - signed by anon IP

2700:

Modern scholarship, however, has proven that Celtic influences were very substantial in Iberia. The Celts in Iberia were divided in two main archaeological and cultural groups, even if the divide is not very clear:

3081:

Should this also be listed by tribe? For instance the damnoni/dumnoni of Britain are possibly the same in origin, as are the cornovi, and the brigantes. So perhaps they also ought to be listed by tribes as well.

3117:

Why do we have a modern day attempt at a map of Wales to show tribes that would've inhabited the area thousands of years ago. Complete nonsense that the tribes began and ended with relative modern boundaries!

2391:

that's to blame (that and assuming the word "barbarian" had its modern connotations of unrestrained viciousness and brutality, which is another argument). I'd be interested to read people's opinions on this.

57: 1892:

statistic subdivisions but real administrative entities, so they should be listed below, probably using a smaller font: we can safely eliminate the subgrouping by type of intermunicipal entity from this

2357:

Is "tribe" really the best term for Celtic population groups? The convention seems to be that such a group is a "tribe" before being conquered by Rome, implying primitive political organisation, and a "

2306:

I see that not only did you put the old, poor list back, you also deleted the link to the much fuller and better list. I am reverting your change, because your edit reduced the quality of the page. --

2844:

There is now an expanded list of Iberian tribes etc that may be a compromise...if you couldedit it and put the relevant info like place names and also the maps on theer I think iut should be ok now.

3180:

in Aramaic and Hebrew (Semitic and Afro-Asiatic languages) means "center" or "central", "district" or "province" and "part" or "sect", not related to Celtic and Indo-European languages meaning of

160: 2151:

I think there's some talk about a mixing of the original Illyres and the migrating Celts... similarly with the Thracians etc. In any case, their mention under "see also" should probably stay. --

3549: 3701: 3580: 3028:

Senones were only in Romagna and the Romagna portion of Marche form river montone (ravenna included) trhough Esino river near Senigallia (so called because of theiri "gallica" inhabitants).

2977:

other, and requested help from each other. In my opinion, you are negotiating well and moving in the right direction. The request for a third opinion might have been premature. Ask again

951: 941: 2463:

by the archeological station of Tavira). My friend... I suspected that you may have a British Isles centered PoV!?! If this discussions turns out to be a war, I will be forced to ask for a

1906: 3706: 3766: 3696: 2199:

the Illyrians and where this information came from, I never knew there were Illyrian Celts?I assumed they would all be Helennic, but due to the gallic progression, have left it!

917: 409: 382: 372: 357: 3556: 387: 377: 3716: 3656: 2854:

My friend... are you saying that we should go back to my former version, given your most recent edits? And yes, I can put the info like place names and also the maps.

1046: 642: 913: 908: 885: 3491:

whose name were derived from Cimmerians of Iranian origin in Europe. Apparently, the Ligurians were either originally non-Celtic, para-Celtic or partially Celtic.

3626: 3425: 3421: 3407: 3295: 3291: 3277: 511: 505: 306: 296: 2434:

decent links? And if you could write about the Gaulish language on that page, this is for the placing of tribes..though it is interesting? I never heard that??

422: 2328:

a tribes of Britain page or not is relevant, as it is not now. Do you think you could then add improve the list of Gauls, rather than deleting it simply again?

912:, a group of contributors interested in Knowledge's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our 3711: 3686: 3651: 862: 852: 3631: 3691: 3621: 2637: 367: 92: 2783:

group of central Spain and the upper Ebro valley, which both present special, local features. The group originated when Celts migrated from what is now

2570:

in the east. Archaeological and historical sources show that at their maximum extent in the early centuries BC, the Celts were also present in areas of

2343:

This map is much better than the last one...but can anyone find one both where all the tribes mentioned are noted and where Wales looks half realistic!

181: 3826: 3731: 1767: 1757: 1165: 1155: 472: 148: 37: 3796: 3761: 3681: 2827:

There is some evidence that Brythonic Celts migrated from Britain to Northern Iberia in the Early Middle Ages. However this culture did not survive.

1816:

The airport is not listed as João Paulo II anywhere. The airport's own website calls itself simply Ponta Delgada, and has no mention of João Paulo.

1569: 1559: 1375: 1365: 1056: 652: 499: 418: 272: 3510:

A tribe named for living near the Atlantic Ocean living in the southern and western Basque Country, itself not a Celtic "homeland". Sometimes, the

3736: 3671: 757: 747: 271:, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join 2985:

your negotiations, but I don't think you will, if you keep doing what you have been doing. In the meantime, I hope my perspective is helpful.

3831: 3781: 3771: 3746: 3661: 3641: 1662: 1480: 1470: 1270: 1260: 828: 547: 537: 3841: 3821: 3811: 3801: 3726: 3676: 2068: 2058: 1918: 1652: 98: 3791: 3786: 3756: 3125: 142: 3816: 3751: 3666: 3646: 3527: 3492: 3185: 3063: 2284: 2233:

I have removed the small, not very complete listing of Gaulish tribes, replacing it with a link to the main list which already existed.

2109: 1733: 1131: 330: 263: 240: 3776: 3741: 3721: 3636: 1535: 1341: 1022: 618: 138: 2964:

The Ogre requested clarification of a point, agreed to the requested contribution, and stated disagreement with wording of a heading.

2090:

The map for my country is wrong. Celtie is a different country than Armorica. And we had more 300 tribes in the territory of France.

3836: 3806: 3584: 3403:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

3273:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

819: 780: 723: 3393: 3383: 3373: 3263: 3253: 3243: 3233: 3223: 3044: 1628: 1446: 1236: 495: 188: 2814:

in NW Portugal is bringing new approaches to understand celtic culture evidences (language, art and religion) in western Iberia.

2365:

in both instances, and the level of political organisation seems to me to be more complex than tribal. Certainly the "tribes" (

2034: 112: 43: 3145: 3102: 3087: 1724: 1685: 1118: 1079: 117: 33: 2552:

coast of Western Europe, the so-called "Celtic fringe", Celtic languages were once predominant over a much wider area, from

3483:

Ligurians had a few different names in this field of study: Ligures, Ligyles, Ambrones and Cimbris. The articles point to

1526: 1503: 1332: 1293: 1013: 974: 609: 570: 87: 2544:. This article is mainly about the ancient and modern views of the celts of pre-Roman Europe, with a separate article on 3564: 3500: 3468: 3338: 2937: 2687:

Celts was rare in Iberia, and did not provide a cultural scenario that could easily be linked to that of Central Europe.

1879: 1871: 714: 675: 215: 154: 2989: 2017: 1996: 1624: 1620: 1615: 1592: 1437: 1398: 1227: 1188: 491: 478: 450: 78: 2958:

The Ogre quoted the other article again, and stated their belief that Ciriii was "contradicting established facts".

2268:

Yes, of course the Celtiberians are Celtic - that is my point. Thus they should be moved up into the main section.

2025: 2002: 3141: 3098: 3083: 3424:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

3294:

to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the

3129: 1850: 3545:

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

2113: 3560: 3531: 3496: 3459: 3365: 3329: 3215: 3189: 3067: 2593: 2522: 2510: 2464: 2280: 1857: 465: 444: 122: 3606: 3588: 3568: 3535: 3473: 3343: 3193: 3170: 3149: 3133: 3106: 3091: 3071: 2995: 2903: 2894: 2880: 2867: 2858: 2848: 2834: 2587: 2482: 2471: 2438: 2423: 2407: 2396: 2347: 2332: 2321: 2310: 2300: 2263: 2252: 2237: 2223: 2213: 2203: 2192: 2177: 2117: 3522:. Another name for Atlantii is Alanti (similarly sounds or spelled like "Aryan"), not to be confused with 3040: 2672: 2506: 2145: 344: 3443:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

3431: 3357: 3313:

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with

3301: 3207: 221: 3364:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 3214:. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit 3166: 2936:, so I'm not the best person to address the content dispute; however, I have some comments about your 3121: 3036: 3032: 2961:

Ciriii created compromise text, and invited The Ogre to contribute to it ("if you could edit it...").

2272: 2105: 174: 68: 3162: 2033: