File talk:Ethnographic Iberia 200 BCE.PNG

Map

Made this map given the bad quality or errors in others Commons maps regarding Pre-Roman Iberia. This is a simplified Ethnographic and Linguistic Map of the Iberian Peninsula at about 200 BCE (at the end of the Second Punic War). Based on the exaustive map done by Portuguese Archeologist Luís Fraga (luisfraga@arqueotavira.com), from the "Campo Arqueológico de Tavira" (Tavira Archeological Camp - official site), in Tavira, Algarve - Portugal. The reference map can be found at this location, and a pdf version, with extensive and detailed information on the criteria used, as well as the long bibliography used to source the map can be found here. The Ogre 03:00, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Ethnographic Iberia 200 BCE.PNG

¡Gracias por el mapa, Ogre! Pero tengo dos preguntas criticas:

1. ¿Está corecto "proto-celtico" por los Lusitanos? Si veviban allí antes de la imigración celtica, pienso, que debe ser "pre-celtico".
2. La Aquitania antigua estaba bajo norte asta la Garuna (Garonne) y el nombre de la ciudad de Auch es derivado del pueblo antiguo Vasco de los Auscones. Pués pienso, que la aerea Aquitana tenía más extensión al norte, que has marcado.

Bon día de Ulamm 09:45, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello Ulamm and thank you for your comments! I'll write in English because at this early hour it's a bit difficult for me to get the Spanish spelling right...! Regarding your critiques:

1. The Lusitanians are clearly and without any sort of doubt Indo-European, they were most probably part of a migratory wave from Central Europe that predates the Celts by some time (how much? nobody seems to know and the Ora Maritima from Avienus only gives a mythological narrative). And in fact they could be described as Pre-Celts instead of Proto-Celts. Many, however, prefer the latter designation because the first one hides the connection found between the en:Lusitanian language and other Celtic languages. As far as we can tell, given the reduced amount of writing material left to us (3 inscriptions...), is that Lusitanian is not quite Celt namely because it present some archaic traits (such as not having lost the initial P, as in porc/um - pig, generally orc/us or something similar in other Celtic languages). Authors like Scarlat Lambrino did consider it a archaic variety of Celtic. But I could change the Proto-Celt designation, so as not to have controversy over details.
2. Your are probably quite right about the Aquitanian region - on that I am oblivious. I'll try to correct it.

Have you given a look at the source for my map (and the pdf version, with extensive and detailed information in Portuguese on the criteria used, as well as the long bibliography used to source the map)? I believe you may find it interesting. And if you write in Spanish you certainly can read Portuguese! See you soon. The Ogre 10:24, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Done some changes. Is it ok now? The Ogre 10:35, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

This way the map is o.k., I think. Up to now I had not the time to read your source. --Ulamm 17:46, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

My proposal for changes in Image:Celts in Europe.png (also see Image talk:Celts in Europe.png). What do you think? Cheers! The Ogre 20:24, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Improvements

Hi Ogre. Good work, but I think that the map needs some improvements:

1. Who are the Vescetani?
2. Why the es: Lacetanos is the only people cited in the northwestern. There is no way to simplify the relation of Iberian peoples. en: Indigetes, en: Laietani, en: Cessetani, en: ausetani, etc.
3. The people from en: Balearic islands aren't en: Iberians
4. The Iberian territory in actual en: France is a small coastal area that doesn’t exceed fr: Enserune.
5. I think the en: aquitani people have to appear explicitly

Tautintanes 22:41, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello Tautintanes! The world is small, ins't it not! At present I'm really busy, but I promise to get back to you as soon as possible. Evn I have issues with my own map! Meanwhile could you check the source referenced map I linked above. Thanks and see really soon! Adeu! The Ogre 23:35, 2 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Ogre! The source is a good map, but contains errors: some of them very big. Obviously the en: Volcae Tectosages aren't of Iberian language, neither the people of Balearic Islands. The differentiation between main and secondary peoples isn’t justified in the northeastern. Among the en: Iberians all the peoples cited in Roman and Greek sources are independent. In the source doesn't appear the Vescetani: you mean es:iacetanos. In the source appear the Aquitani (Tarbelli, Tarusates, Ausci, etc.).--Tautintanes 20:12, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello Tautintanes! I left a message for you regarding other stuff in the english wikipedia. Regarding your comments, yes, I see your point - it may take me a while to correct them since I'm trying to learn to use a new image editor which produces SVG files, much better than these. I also have some issues with the Oretani - are they Iberian or Celtic? There are contradictory sources. Regarding the Balearics, they where what, does one know? The Ogre 21:03, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi Ogre! The language areas in your map should match existing en: Paleohispanic languages. Turdetanian as a language does not make sense. Or Tartessian residual without en:Tartessian language. What means Pre-Celtic: en:Lusitanian language?. The en:Celtiberian language is well defined, but in this map disappears in a broad Celtic area. en:Celtic is a broad term: in the context of the Iberian Peninsula the correct name for all the Celtic related languages is en:Hispano-Celtic. --Tautintanes 22:47, 3 March 2008 (UTC)

According to the source map above and the Spanish article es:Turdetanos, they did not speak an Iberian language, but a language direved from Tartessian, altoghether another language isolate, as you know. The Ogre 01:57, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

Lusitanians and "Proto-celts"

From what I understand, the affinities of these peoples is uncertain, so maybe this should be mentioned specifically in the legend of the image ? From what I have read at various sources, many scholars (based on Roman sources) consider the Lusitanians to be a Celtiberian people as most of central and western Iberia was prior ot the Roman conquest. Solely Iberian culture remained strongest in the east and far south, possibly one of the earliest factors in the distinct development of Catalan people and culture (who's region today you'vep robably noticed is strongly associated to that of the Iberians; see Catalan Countries) compared to the rest of Iberia. One thing I think you should take in mind is that Indo-European speech may have been brought firstly by the Iberians themselves (whenever they arrived), even if they came earlier (in the Neolithic) rathern than later (the Copper or Bronze Age). In any case, the Mesolithic and Neolithic invasions from the eastern Mediterranean (via the coasts of Europe or North Africa) became a major component for the whole Iberian population, including even the Basques who retain the most amount of Paleolithic ancestry, hence the overall Mediterranean appearance of indigenous Spaniards and Portuguese. This is why many of the peoples of the Mediterranean (including others who have much less of the Western European Paleolithic ancestry that is common in Iberia), although distinct in many aspects of physical appearance also have obvious common ones (most evident is the "olive skin" or similar complexions). 70.48.30.42 Epf 06:43, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

Lacetani

Hi Ogre! I expect the problems in en: Iberians could be solved. The new version of the map has really improved. But the ethnic map is clearly incomplet in the northwestern. Usually we only know the existence of a people because a Greek or Roman source mentions the existence of that people. But in some cases, like the northwestern Iberians, additionally, we have self-references in the coins that they mint: laiesken (en: Laietani), undikesken (en: Indigetes), ausesken (en: Ausetani), cesesken (en: Cessetani), ildirkesken (en: Ilergetes or en: Ilercavones) and sedeisken (es: sedetanos). Paradoxally, the Lacetani doesn't mint coins with his name. If you try to paint all the northwestern Iberian peoples, the map could be unreadable, but maybe you can add at least those that mint coins with his name--Tautintanes 21:54, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Lusitanians and Baleares

Both the Baleares and Lusitanian regions are improperly mentioned on this map. First of all, according to the original map, the peoples of the Balearic Islands ARE Iberians. Ogre and anyone else does not have the right to change such accorindg to their own POV without discussing it first. As for the Lusitanians, it says that they are Indo-European, pre-Celtic, not simply "Pre-Celtic". Please make the changes otherwise this map will need to be removed from what articles it is used in. Ciao, 69.156.90.14 Epf 04:29, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I noticed that on the map, Celtic and pre-Celtic are listed under Indo-European. The Baleares region needs to be changed however. 69.156.90.14 04:35, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

The map is wrong about the Baleares Epf - it is not my POV - in fact I also thought that they were Iberians, but Tautintanes‎ corrected me and I researched it (go to the Spanish article on the Baleares for starters). The Lusitanian were Indo-European and Pre or Proto-Celtic (as I have explained to you before) - to the first statement all the sources say so (can you even find one who doesn't?), regarding the second statement there is discussion, since some say they were just Celts - this is not the majority modern view, though. Epf, I can't really understand you. What do you aim since clearly it seem to me you're aiming at something? My objective here it's just to portray the know published facts about such issues, without any POV whatsover. Is this your stance too? Because sometimes it doesn't look like it. I even proppsed to work with you, but your attitude is confrontational, non-cooperative and it desregards sources. What do you want? The Ogre 04:42, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

• I see you've changed the image to show their linguistic affiliation as unknown which is fine. I am curious though if you could provide some sources which state they weren't Iberian or were Indo-European (just for reading). The Iberians may (though unlikely) themselves have been Indo-European speakers, especially if they were supplemented by further eastern mediterranean migrations during the Bronze Age since that would coincide with the spread of Indo-European languages. [1]

Balearic Islands

Concerning the islands of Majorca and Minorca, I suggest the "?" sign to be changed by "Talaiotic Culture". What do you think about?