![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
I have found some better public domain maps from William R. Shepherd's Historical Atlas. This would be a good replacement for File:Droysens-19c.jpg, which is in German and not as detailed. Here is a detailed map of the Germanic migrations. Here is a detailed political map of Europe in 486. I would do it myself, but I do not have the necessary software to cut and crop JPEG images without them losing quality.
All of the pages from the Historical Atlas are displayed as JPEG images here. Peasimage543 ( talk) 22:24, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
In fact, it looks like you already have them all at Wikimedia Commons: Commons:Category:Historical Atlas by William R. Shepherd. They just need to be cut and cropped to make them appropriate for display on article pages. Peasimage543 ( talk) 22:31, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps we should look into blocking IPs or protecting the page if this BC/AC nonsense is going to keep cropping up. Seems to happen on a routine basis. Obviously this and any other articles should use BCE/CE format. Certainly this one. Obotlig ( talk) 02:44, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Can we try to avoid this? It's anachronistic. For lack of a better term, it might be appropriate for collective descriptions of the Suebi, Marcomanni, Francii, etc. but it's seriously misguided for many other Germanic peoples, such as the Scandinavian peoples, the Vandals, the Goths, and so on. Describing the East Germanic peoples as 'Germans' and claiming their history as German history is like describing the South and West Slavic peoples as 'Russians' and claiming their history as Russian history. 71.191.228.6 ( talk) 02:33, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Germans is an invented English word. Like Athen(s) or The Hague. Its called Athen without (s) and Den Haag not The Hague. You won't call Denmark, The Mark, will you? We should stop using that sort of English. It confuses the world outside the English sphere. Prophet of Hell ( talk) 11:48, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
A lot of recent scholarship rejects Jordanes and sees Jordanes' description of Ermaneric's empire as a product of Cassiodorus' need to invent suitable ancestors for Theodoric. Both Kulikowski and Heather reject this narrative. 71.191.228.6 ( talk) 02:33, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Elton argues against it. 71.191.228.6 ( talk) 02:33, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Who did this thing on the right side? Kopernik was Polish, Hitler was Austrian, Shakespeare was British and so on. Someone has huge imagination... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.73.16.229 ( talk) 03:20, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
If Kopernik is really a pole then he is slavic. Austrians are Germanic peoples like half of the British because of the Anglo-Saxon settlement. That has nothing to do with imagination, its knowledge of history. Nothing that is not a historical fact. Thats how migrations work. Prophet of Hell ( talk) 06:42, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Why is Kopernik included in the list of Germanic persons at the top of the page? He was of a Polish heritage, which is Slavic and not Germanic. 68.1.172.2 ( talk) 03:38, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
I have reverted the infobox on the right. This article is about the historic Germanic peoples, i.e. Iron Age tribes. There is an important difference between "peoples" and "people". Having those portraits under the title "Germanic peoples" makes it appear as if each and every one were a tribal entity. If you want a list under "Germanic peoples", it would have to be a list of the peoples, such as the Gutones, the Semnoni, the Cherusci etc. I won't meddle with the Slavic peoples article, but I find it highly unfortunate in that article as well. At the same time: if someone finds a first image more fitting and less tacky and anachronistic than the Hermannsdenkmal, I would be absolutely thrilled. Trigaranus ( talk) 07:59, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Newsleep is right. The Germanic peoples are the category above Germans, German Americans including Norwegians and Emglishmen. The Germanic peoples descendants are still alive like the Slavic Russians, Ukrainians or Poles. I think you don't understand that because your language is responsible for that literary chaos. Prophet of Hell ( talk) 11:39, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
if we are going to have an infobox, can we please atleast have the one used on every germanic ethnic group, the ones with a picture collage instead of this bad quality photo collection 95.199.146.180 ( talk) 13:41, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
I recently removed the following sentence from the lead: "As the centre of the Industrial Revolution, the Germanic countries ememerged as the foremost military, cultural and economic powers in the Modern era, spreading it's culture too all parts of the world, with English becoming the lingua franca of international communication. " Besides the obvious typographical errors, this sentence is unsourced and unencyclopedic. It doesn't really have much to do with the Germanic peoples in the period described in the bulk of the article; per WP:LEAD the lead is to summarize the article's contents. Furthermore, it borders on ethnic chauvinism by suggesting a relationship between ancient Germanic peoples and contemporary cultural dominance. This is pretty poor form; it would be a shame if this important article (which I stumbled upon via the Visigoth article) were to become a forum for ethnic supremacists, confused nationalists, or people who just want to exhibit a misguided pride in their "ancestry." The sentence has to go, in the absence of corresponding, well-sourced, and relevant content in the body of the article.
As a P.S., I also agree that the portrait collection in the infobox is way, way out of line and tune here. Sindinero ( talk) 07:16, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
What do other editors think of the expansion of the lead? Diff to show how it has evolved. To me it no longer leads like a lead. See WP:LEAD.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 09:15, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
The Braun & Schneider plates were created in 1861-1880. They are highly unreliable depictions of costume that invent unattested details and mix up periods of history and should no longer be used for educational purposes. 207.210.136.252 ( talk) 20:23, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Seriously, Contemporary Germanic peoples are Germans, English, Icelandic, Norwegians, Swedes, Danish, Faroese, Austrians, Swiss Germans, Dutch, Frisian and a few others. The ancestors of those cultures came from Germanic tribes who migrated across Europe, settled and became Nations. Just because people are afraid to talk about European ethnic groups for whatever reason doesn't negate fact.
Nobody says the Amerindian people don't exist. Nobody says the Chinese, or Japanese or Koreans or Arabs, Turks, Egyptians and so forth Exist. You all are dumb. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.187.244.56 ( talk) 03:46, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Another ethnic infobox concerned with the modern Germanic-speaking nations has come up. This is once more a problem with the ambiguity of "peoples" as used in Ethnology and History. Since this article is about the tribal stage (hence "peoples") of the various Germanic ethne in Antiquity and early Mediaeval times, the use of such an infobox is rather doubtful, as it is anachronistic in relation to the article's contents (not taking into account that the numbers given do not seem to be in order). Expanding this article to include a worthwhile section on the Germanic-speaking peoples of modern times would IMHO be going too far, and most likely loaded with the most tedious debate about "What is Germanic" (beyond linguistics, and that is already where the consensus would come to a stand-still) from the start. I would not be unhappy to see that infobox gone. Can I have a few yays or nays? Trigaranus ( talk) 06:58, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
This article is almost entirely based on a Nordicist conception of Germanic peoples of today. There are multiple ethno-linguistic roots of Germanic peoples beyond Nordic roots. First of all there are known Latin and Slavic roots amongst the Germans, second of all there are mixed-race people with Germanic descent, such as Afro-Germans, Afro-Dutch, Indo people (people of mixed Dutch- Indonesian descent. I have attempted to reduce this Nordicist conception by adding a modern definition into the intro as well as including two pictures of mixed-race Indo-Dutch and Afro-German people. However substantial work needs to be done to reduce the Nordicist bias.-- R-41 ( talk) 17:50, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Just to help prevent a fully-fledged edit war: the term "Germanic peoples" is generally used only to refer to Germanic tribal entities (hence "peoples") attested from the time of the Cimbrian War onward; it is no longer applied to any group after the Germanic polities had evolved into mediaeval states by the end of the 1st millennium AD. This limited phase in history is what the term refers to and what there are results for when one looks it up in the Encyclopedia Britannica or online. It is generally not used to refer to the much-transformed nation states of the present where Germanic languages are spoken, nor to the inhabitants of those. Trigaranus ( talk) 23:30, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
I was just wondering: would it be advisable and less annoying for everybody involved to move this page to " Ancient Germanic peoples" and clear the field under "Germanic peoples" for everbody who feels it imperative to refer to Newton, Heidi Klum and Alexander G. Bell as belonging to a still-existing identity group of modern "Germanic" peoples? I've sort of had it with that nonsense. Trigaranus ( talk) 16:50, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
We have two articles about the Slavs: one about the modern Slavic Peoples and one about the Early Slavs. Jingiby ( talk) 16:55, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Please do NOT use this image without any further information about the depicted scene.The images from the 19th and early 20th century costumes books are very problematic and they are not representing an actual state of scientific knowledge. The people on the image are wearing a conglomerate of equipment from the pre roman iron age with bronze age detials (e.g. belt of the woman) until to the Midle Ages (15th century Knightly girdle type belt of the right man). The costume are completely fantasy without any historic evidence. The shoes seems to be roman types but the leather straps putees are an 19th century invention inspired from textile puttees of the 7th century and illustrations of the 10th to 12th century. The illustration is a more a product of the Historicism (art) than an scientific illustration. Either please remove the image or please insert an very clear description. From that period lots of archaeological textile finds are preserved for example File:Thorsberg Tunic.jpg, File:Thorsberg Trousers.jpg, Image:Schoes of Damendorf-Man.jpg or a reconstruction of a File:Germanic shoe.jpg -- Bullenwächter ( talk) 09:12, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
The current image may not be a good choice either, since, according to a number of online sources, the Vatican triumphal relief (see also here: [1]) has been very heavily restored -notably, the head has been added- and may not even represent a Germanic warrior. See this description by J.M.B. Toynbee (1934):
Toynbee is referring to this object:
Apparently, the beardless face was modelled after some of the ancient personifications of Roman provinces:
Cf. further:
The boar standard is seen as Celtic rather than Germanic:
For a close-up of Galatia (or Gallia) on Augustus' cuirass, see here: [8], no. 64. Iblardi ( talk) 22:24, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
banned | ||
---|---|---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||
can somebody please restore the Modern Germanic peoples paragraph and due to the fact that Seb_az86556 will automatically reject this i need a neutral third party person (someone else than Seb_az86556) answer this request (either rejecting it or applying it), thanks. 90.236.174.237 ( talk) 19:38, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
|
what is wrong with "Modern Germanic peoples are the Scandinavians ( Norwegians, Swedish, Danish, Icelanders, and Faroese), Germans (including Austrians and Sudeten Germans), Alemannic Swiss, Liechtensteiners, Luxembourgers, the Dutch, Flemings, Afrikaners, Frisians, the English and others who still speak languages derived from the ancestral Germanic dialects."? 95.196.171.69 ( talk) 20:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
IP, stop yelling at people, your stance is obviously not self-evident; there's an ongoing discussion about the scope of this article. If you continue to add the paragraph before consensus is reached, you will be blocked for edit warring. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 22:51, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
I think editors of this page should also comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Germanic peoples (modern) .-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 11:28, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
This discussion is closed. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Can someone please tell me where the Germanic DNA project has come from. Because it does not EXIST!. You can prove to the world, that I am wrong by putting a link up to a German DNA project from a GERMAN website _ie:.de. Here are some facts you should google: British Dna came from Spain . Links are below, English language did not exist until the late 12th century. Which the Normans brought from France to the present day England. Before that the majority of English people spoke and wrote in Latin, Roman, now Italian. Look at your old Latin writings and the cities old Latin names. Ireland, Scotland, Wales national Lanuague'es are Gallic( Define:Celtic some one who speaks a Celtic language) so when in past history where English people first called "Celts". Have a look it was first recorded in a 18th century book!. Sorry but the Celtic culture finished around(450AD?) and was part of the Iron age, not a race of people's. And as for the Vikings (define:seafaring warriors)later sometime after the 8th century they arrived in the British Isle's. What are you talking about a mass migration? Why? What? Where and When?. A few small tribes, most likely traders, and farmers migrated. Some in the past did come for plunder like the 300 boats from Denmark that raided York. No excuse my written English is not so good, and look how easy for me it is to use a internet search engine to find out about History. Also Poland, Russians, And the German Slav "Rani" tribe used Viking methods of the same era. But for Germany to admit they have a DNA project. I believe this will never happen because they had more Slav, west Slav, Slav, Bavaria Slavic, Germania Slavica, Sorbs, Wends, Obotrites, tribes than any other country. They did some very bad things in World war 2. And Yes, I have English ancestory more than you know!. Casurgis from Sydney links below. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2166573/Prehistoric-DNA-bones-cave-proves-English-originally-came-Spain.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14630012 http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/mythsofbritishancestry/#.Ugi2QtKBlLg http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-406108/Ancient-Britons-come-mainly-Spain.html http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Celts http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-18489735 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14630012 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_the_Iberian_Peninsula http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/25820-R1b-in-Iberian-Peninsula-France-and-the-British-Islands German Slav, Slavic, Slavia History http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limes_Saxoniae /info/en/?search=Polabian_Slavs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wends http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rani_(Slavic_tribe) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomeranians_(Slavic_tribe) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mieszko_I_of_Poland parts of Germany under polish control /info/en/?search=Glomacze /info/en/?search=Sorbs /info/en/?search=Dervan /info/en/?search=Wagri http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golensizi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Slavs /info/en/?search=Bavaria_Slavica /info/en/?search=Lusatia German Slavic speakers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mecklenburg German Slavic speakers /info/en/?search=Chronicon_Slavorum /info/en/?search=Margraviate_of_Meissen German Slavic speakers /info/en/?search=Margraviate_of_Brandenburg German Slavic speakers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_IV,_Holy_Roman_Emperor Parts of Germany under Czech, Roman empire control http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germania_Slavica http://www.sachsen.de/en/276.htm READ ME! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.33.0.254 ( talk) 11:24, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
|
I can't edit the article. There's a "the" ("the the Norwegians") too much. -- Gabbahead. ( talk) 13:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
Done. Thanks for noticing the error. Dimadick ( talk) 06:55, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
The Persian nation contains a number of tribes as listed here. ... : the Pasargadae, Maraphii, and Maspii, upon which all the other tribes are dependent. Of these, the Pasargadae are the most distinguished; they contain the clan of the Achaemenids from which spring the Perseid kings. Other tribes are the Panthialaei, Derusiaei, Germanii, all of which are attached to the soil, the remainder -the Dai, Mardi, Dropici, Sagarti, being nomadic. —Herodotus, Histories 1.101 & 125 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.12.219 ( talk) 13:23, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Encyclopedia_of_European_Peoples -- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 20:11, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
WHART IS WRONG WITH THE CREATORS OF THIS RIDICULOUS CELTIC FANS LIES . GERMANIA IS FROM IRMINONES OF HIRMINONES THE FEDERACY OF GERMANIC PEOPLES,INCLUDING SUEBI AND HESSEN OR OTHERWISE KNOWN CHAUSSI — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.84.132.211 ( talk) 20:44, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Please fix Germania, Germaina Magna it's clearly shown that many Czech towns where part of Germania Magna and please look at the mountain ranges on the maps, Swiss alps, tatra mountains, Sudetes. Even Olomouc over in the North east of the Czech Republic had two different latin names (Iuliomontium,Roman fort (Mons Iulii). Also its a fact the the Blucina Sword from 5th century was found near Brno and from a germanic king. Czech cities located in Germanina Magna taken from Ptolemy's maps 2nd century AD located in present day Czech Republic. Furgisatis u České Budějovice, Meliodunum in the sand, Strevinta for Hříměždic to the West of Sedlčany, Casurgis is Prague, Redintuinum u Loun, Nomisterium in Litoměřice, Hegetmatia in Mladá Boleslav, Budorgis in Cologne, Coridorgis in Jihlava, Eburum u Hrádku is Znojmo, Parienna in Breclav, Eburodunum is Brno, Setuia at Komořan near Vyškov, Felicia is Vyškova, Asanca is Kojetína, Carredunum is Rýmařov I have supplyed many links below to verify.
Atilla the Hun never went through Czech lands. Do your own research he went up the Danube ( Germany, Austria) and the Rhine West Germany, France) and he was killed in France(Gaul) in 454AD. Also its a fact that the Blucina Sword from 5th century was found near Brno(Latin:Eburodunum) and was from a Germanic king. Two gold Germanic swords of the same type have been found in present day central Germany located in Pleidelsheim and Villingendorf. Look at the links above and make your own opinion. And then decide if an Americian writer(Note: Americia was and will always be a former British and English colony)who wrote a 20th century book about European history when he or she has never ever been to Europe. Note Americia did not exist in the middle ages only native Indians lived there before 15th century. Casurgis from Australia is watching 12.07.2014 And yes I am part English. The Mythicial Saxons are from here: http://www.sachsen.de/en/276.htm and: http://www.sachsen-anhalt.de/lang/english/history-politics/history/ . You still believe that there was a mass migration??. All your old documents from 5th century in Britannia where in Latin and you where mostly Christians. Germania Magna where Pagans as even your Danish vikings were: http://denmark.dk/en/society/history/ to the late 10th century. Remember your King Alfred from the 8th century went to Rome to be crowned king: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/dominicselwood/100255437/king-alfred-was-a-roman-catholic-lets-bury-him-in-westminster-cathedral/ .Forgive me i was not taught this at school but at least I am capable to still learn and educate myself except for my bad grammer and spelling. Thou knows nothing!. Casurgis out — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.32.240.50 ( talk) 02:44, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
The first I note FIRST German king was Charlemange of the 8th century!. So old English was latin as ins Bede's writtings, to King William of 1066 the dooms day book just to name a few examples. German did not exist in the 5th century it is IMPOSSIBLE!. So please if OLD English existed before the 13th century NORMANS that brought it to England. Please show some evidence. Also northen Germany near Holstein was part of Germany Magna, and they where not part of the Roman Empire, so they where not belivers of Christ. You need to do some research and stop writing dishonest lies. Atilla the Hun went up the danube and rhine and was killed in France 454AD. Avars had bases in Hunguary and Bugaria in the 8,9th century. Who ever wrote this of low intelligence. So please show the world!. Ohh sorry I believe some else wrote some thing simlar but you keep deleting his comments. Propaganda machine is at work here — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.80.98.184 ( talk) 16:00, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
All you do is tell your lies here. Engish language did not exist until the Norman's( Orginally a tribe from Scandinavia) brought it over from present day France over sometime in the late 13th century. Facts are 1. German language did not exist until 8th century!. Why see ptolemy's maps from 2nd century AD, Germania (Mostly Roman, Christians and where latin speakers and writers, and Germania Manga which includes the area's of Schleswig-Holstein ( East and northern side, Non Christians, most likey did not speak latin). Charlemange was note: First German king in mid 8th century who started the use of the German language see Monk "Abogran". So how could these Anglo Saxon mythical tribes speak OLD ENGLISH when the German language did not exist in the 5th century its IMPOSSIBLE!. Attila the hun also traveled up the Danube and then the Rhine and was killed in Gaul (France) no where near the Angles. No Huns made it that far ever, And the later Avars around the 8th and 9th century had bases in Hungary and Bulgaria. Mongols in the 13th century also never made it to Schleswig-Holstein area. Please supply some artifacts some copies of the actual documents from 1000-1500 years ago. And shame me in front of the whole world. Also the slavic tribes see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limes_Saxoniae. Arrived in 9th century but yes all the Germanic and Germans tribes left for Britannia in the 5th century AD. My history is not the best but I believe only two unarmed Saxon tribes arrived by ship in the city of present day Wessex around 460,470AD but Saxony is near Czech Republic?. All English old documents like the dooms day book 1066, Bede the Monk, as example are in latin, all your churches before say the 16th century where all christian and later Catholic. I could go and on but you really should know better. OLD ENGLISH. Thou shall be quite now. https://www.google.com.au/search?q=germania+magna&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=VYZ5U5ziGcnikAWAsoG4DQ&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ&biw=1280&bih=684#q=magna+germania&spell=1&tbm=isch https://www.google.com.au/#q=britannia+latin+cities+names http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Latin_place_names_in_Britain ROMANS spoke and wrote in latin. SCHLESWIG HOLSTEIN WAS IN GERMANY MANGA they where not Christens like you!. OLD ENGLISH is mostly a latin based language
The article stated: Because of its comparative isolation and the heavy invasion by Germanic tribesmen from a part of northern Europe outside the reaches of Roman influence, Anglo-Saxon England was thoroughly Germanic and would remain more Germanic in culture than the rest of Europe through the greater part of the Middle Ages. John Blair argued that a good deal of what Tacitus wrote of the early Germans in the first century A.D. applies accurately to the Anglo-Saxons and that even their conversion to Christianity left much in their customs and outlook intact. [1]
I do not see any reason to believe why England (not even thinking of the strong Romanic and Celtic influences) should stay more Germanic - whatever that is - than, say, Norways. The references certainly do not make up for the strength of the claim. -- Zz ( talk) 14:06, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
The article indicates that during the iron age the Germanic people were spread east to the Vistula river. This is clearly contradicted by the current genetic evidence <Juras A, Dabert M, Kushniarevich A, Malmstro¨m H, Raghavan M, et al. (2014) Ancient DNA Reveals Matrilineal Continuity in Present-Day Poland over the Last Two Millennia. PLoS ONE 9(10): e110839. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0110839> and any archeological evidence needs to be very carefully checked to its source as it may be politically motivated. Whitecygent — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whitecygent ( talk • contribs) 12:47, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
Tacitus and Caesar are mentioned. Clearly they are the two main people who wrote about the Germans. However...For years now their accounts have been known as propaganda typical of Roman writings. The Romans often embellished or demonized peoples, with no relation to reality, depending on their political goal.
Tacitus & Caesar's accounts should be listed as a Roman account, nothing more.
Numerous objective research shows their accounts to be flawed. For instance, detailed analysis of DNA and other Germanic bodies in Germany, has definitely concluded that the diet of the Germans was not "exclusively milk, flesh, and cheese" as per Caesar, but an overwhelmingly vegetarian diet made of cereals!!! Probably the Romans ate more Cheese & flesh than the Germans!
It has also been proven through archeological research that Germania/Germany was highly agricultural and the German tribes were not nomadic but deeply sedentary, in a culture similar to the German culture of the middle ages. When the Germans moved...It was because of outside event.
The interesting bit is why the original tribes left Scandinavia to settle Germany. But once in Germany they stayed there and did not move until the Volkerwanderung. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:810D:E80:17E:BDB9:CF4:1217:E4C5 ( talk) 17:54, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
The usage and primary topic of Varieties of German is under discussion, see talk:German dialects -- 65.94.43.89 ( talk) 05:08, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Since when are Scots a Germanic people. They are a Celtic people. Some will say that they speak English and have Germanic influence. Of course. What about Jamaicans then? Pipo.
If this is becoming a major job, and requiring "harsh" tagging, then I still wonder how clear the evidence is that WP copied from the website rather than the other way around. I have no look closely by the way, but am very thankful that you have made this effort!-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 10:33, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
First of all we should all thank Obenritter for the efforts being made of late on this article. Small thing. I just noticed that in its current form the first sub-section of the History section is mainly about the Iron age and therefore repeated at the beginning of the next section in other words. Indeed the Iron age section also makes reference to previous periods.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 10:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
In the first paragraph of the segment called 'Roman Empire period' there is mention of Damitian. Shouldn't it rather be Domitian? MartínezFlores ( talk) 19:36, 10 December 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 | Archive 2 | Archive 3 | Archive 4 | Archive 5 | Archive 6 | → | Archive 10 |
I have found some better public domain maps from William R. Shepherd's Historical Atlas. This would be a good replacement for File:Droysens-19c.jpg, which is in German and not as detailed. Here is a detailed map of the Germanic migrations. Here is a detailed political map of Europe in 486. I would do it myself, but I do not have the necessary software to cut and crop JPEG images without them losing quality.
All of the pages from the Historical Atlas are displayed as JPEG images here. Peasimage543 ( talk) 22:24, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
In fact, it looks like you already have them all at Wikimedia Commons: Commons:Category:Historical Atlas by William R. Shepherd. They just need to be cut and cropped to make them appropriate for display on article pages. Peasimage543 ( talk) 22:31, 30 December 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps we should look into blocking IPs or protecting the page if this BC/AC nonsense is going to keep cropping up. Seems to happen on a routine basis. Obviously this and any other articles should use BCE/CE format. Certainly this one. Obotlig ( talk) 02:44, 23 February 2012 (UTC)
Can we try to avoid this? It's anachronistic. For lack of a better term, it might be appropriate for collective descriptions of the Suebi, Marcomanni, Francii, etc. but it's seriously misguided for many other Germanic peoples, such as the Scandinavian peoples, the Vandals, the Goths, and so on. Describing the East Germanic peoples as 'Germans' and claiming their history as German history is like describing the South and West Slavic peoples as 'Russians' and claiming their history as Russian history. 71.191.228.6 ( talk) 02:33, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Germans is an invented English word. Like Athen(s) or The Hague. Its called Athen without (s) and Den Haag not The Hague. You won't call Denmark, The Mark, will you? We should stop using that sort of English. It confuses the world outside the English sphere. Prophet of Hell ( talk) 11:48, 8 April 2012 (UTC)
A lot of recent scholarship rejects Jordanes and sees Jordanes' description of Ermaneric's empire as a product of Cassiodorus' need to invent suitable ancestors for Theodoric. Both Kulikowski and Heather reject this narrative. 71.191.228.6 ( talk) 02:33, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Elton argues against it. 71.191.228.6 ( talk) 02:33, 7 April 2012 (UTC)
Who did this thing on the right side? Kopernik was Polish, Hitler was Austrian, Shakespeare was British and so on. Someone has huge imagination... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.73.16.229 ( talk) 03:20, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
If Kopernik is really a pole then he is slavic. Austrians are Germanic peoples like half of the British because of the Anglo-Saxon settlement. That has nothing to do with imagination, its knowledge of history. Nothing that is not a historical fact. Thats how migrations work. Prophet of Hell ( talk) 06:42, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Why is Kopernik included in the list of Germanic persons at the top of the page? He was of a Polish heritage, which is Slavic and not Germanic. 68.1.172.2 ( talk) 03:38, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
I have reverted the infobox on the right. This article is about the historic Germanic peoples, i.e. Iron Age tribes. There is an important difference between "peoples" and "people". Having those portraits under the title "Germanic peoples" makes it appear as if each and every one were a tribal entity. If you want a list under "Germanic peoples", it would have to be a list of the peoples, such as the Gutones, the Semnoni, the Cherusci etc. I won't meddle with the Slavic peoples article, but I find it highly unfortunate in that article as well. At the same time: if someone finds a first image more fitting and less tacky and anachronistic than the Hermannsdenkmal, I would be absolutely thrilled. Trigaranus ( talk) 07:59, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Newsleep is right. The Germanic peoples are the category above Germans, German Americans including Norwegians and Emglishmen. The Germanic peoples descendants are still alive like the Slavic Russians, Ukrainians or Poles. I think you don't understand that because your language is responsible for that literary chaos. Prophet of Hell ( talk) 11:39, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
if we are going to have an infobox, can we please atleast have the one used on every germanic ethnic group, the ones with a picture collage instead of this bad quality photo collection 95.199.146.180 ( talk) 13:41, 23 April 2012 (UTC)
I recently removed the following sentence from the lead: "As the centre of the Industrial Revolution, the Germanic countries ememerged as the foremost military, cultural and economic powers in the Modern era, spreading it's culture too all parts of the world, with English becoming the lingua franca of international communication. " Besides the obvious typographical errors, this sentence is unsourced and unencyclopedic. It doesn't really have much to do with the Germanic peoples in the period described in the bulk of the article; per WP:LEAD the lead is to summarize the article's contents. Furthermore, it borders on ethnic chauvinism by suggesting a relationship between ancient Germanic peoples and contemporary cultural dominance. This is pretty poor form; it would be a shame if this important article (which I stumbled upon via the Visigoth article) were to become a forum for ethnic supremacists, confused nationalists, or people who just want to exhibit a misguided pride in their "ancestry." The sentence has to go, in the absence of corresponding, well-sourced, and relevant content in the body of the article.
As a P.S., I also agree that the portrait collection in the infobox is way, way out of line and tune here. Sindinero ( talk) 07:16, 1 May 2012 (UTC)
What do other editors think of the expansion of the lead? Diff to show how it has evolved. To me it no longer leads like a lead. See WP:LEAD.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 09:15, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
The Braun & Schneider plates were created in 1861-1880. They are highly unreliable depictions of costume that invent unattested details and mix up periods of history and should no longer be used for educational purposes. 207.210.136.252 ( talk) 20:23, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
Seriously, Contemporary Germanic peoples are Germans, English, Icelandic, Norwegians, Swedes, Danish, Faroese, Austrians, Swiss Germans, Dutch, Frisian and a few others. The ancestors of those cultures came from Germanic tribes who migrated across Europe, settled and became Nations. Just because people are afraid to talk about European ethnic groups for whatever reason doesn't negate fact.
Nobody says the Amerindian people don't exist. Nobody says the Chinese, or Japanese or Koreans or Arabs, Turks, Egyptians and so forth Exist. You all are dumb. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.187.244.56 ( talk) 03:46, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
Another ethnic infobox concerned with the modern Germanic-speaking nations has come up. This is once more a problem with the ambiguity of "peoples" as used in Ethnology and History. Since this article is about the tribal stage (hence "peoples") of the various Germanic ethne in Antiquity and early Mediaeval times, the use of such an infobox is rather doubtful, as it is anachronistic in relation to the article's contents (not taking into account that the numbers given do not seem to be in order). Expanding this article to include a worthwhile section on the Germanic-speaking peoples of modern times would IMHO be going too far, and most likely loaded with the most tedious debate about "What is Germanic" (beyond linguistics, and that is already where the consensus would come to a stand-still) from the start. I would not be unhappy to see that infobox gone. Can I have a few yays or nays? Trigaranus ( talk) 06:58, 19 November 2012 (UTC)
This article is almost entirely based on a Nordicist conception of Germanic peoples of today. There are multiple ethno-linguistic roots of Germanic peoples beyond Nordic roots. First of all there are known Latin and Slavic roots amongst the Germans, second of all there are mixed-race people with Germanic descent, such as Afro-Germans, Afro-Dutch, Indo people (people of mixed Dutch- Indonesian descent. I have attempted to reduce this Nordicist conception by adding a modern definition into the intro as well as including two pictures of mixed-race Indo-Dutch and Afro-German people. However substantial work needs to be done to reduce the Nordicist bias.-- R-41 ( talk) 17:50, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Just to help prevent a fully-fledged edit war: the term "Germanic peoples" is generally used only to refer to Germanic tribal entities (hence "peoples") attested from the time of the Cimbrian War onward; it is no longer applied to any group after the Germanic polities had evolved into mediaeval states by the end of the 1st millennium AD. This limited phase in history is what the term refers to and what there are results for when one looks it up in the Encyclopedia Britannica or online. It is generally not used to refer to the much-transformed nation states of the present where Germanic languages are spoken, nor to the inhabitants of those. Trigaranus ( talk) 23:30, 8 February 2013 (UTC)
I was just wondering: would it be advisable and less annoying for everybody involved to move this page to " Ancient Germanic peoples" and clear the field under "Germanic peoples" for everbody who feels it imperative to refer to Newton, Heidi Klum and Alexander G. Bell as belonging to a still-existing identity group of modern "Germanic" peoples? I've sort of had it with that nonsense. Trigaranus ( talk) 16:50, 17 March 2013 (UTC)
We have two articles about the Slavs: one about the modern Slavic Peoples and one about the Early Slavs. Jingiby ( talk) 16:55, 19 March 2013 (UTC)
Please do NOT use this image without any further information about the depicted scene.The images from the 19th and early 20th century costumes books are very problematic and they are not representing an actual state of scientific knowledge. The people on the image are wearing a conglomerate of equipment from the pre roman iron age with bronze age detials (e.g. belt of the woman) until to the Midle Ages (15th century Knightly girdle type belt of the right man). The costume are completely fantasy without any historic evidence. The shoes seems to be roman types but the leather straps putees are an 19th century invention inspired from textile puttees of the 7th century and illustrations of the 10th to 12th century. The illustration is a more a product of the Historicism (art) than an scientific illustration. Either please remove the image or please insert an very clear description. From that period lots of archaeological textile finds are preserved for example File:Thorsberg Tunic.jpg, File:Thorsberg Trousers.jpg, Image:Schoes of Damendorf-Man.jpg or a reconstruction of a File:Germanic shoe.jpg -- Bullenwächter ( talk) 09:12, 24 November 2012 (UTC)
The current image may not be a good choice either, since, according to a number of online sources, the Vatican triumphal relief (see also here: [1]) has been very heavily restored -notably, the head has been added- and may not even represent a Germanic warrior. See this description by J.M.B. Toynbee (1934):
Toynbee is referring to this object:
Apparently, the beardless face was modelled after some of the ancient personifications of Roman provinces:
Cf. further:
The boar standard is seen as Celtic rather than Germanic:
For a close-up of Galatia (or Gallia) on Augustus' cuirass, see here: [8], no. 64. Iblardi ( talk) 22:24, 1 June 2013 (UTC)
banned | ||
---|---|---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. | ||
can somebody please restore the Modern Germanic peoples paragraph and due to the fact that Seb_az86556 will automatically reject this i need a neutral third party person (someone else than Seb_az86556) answer this request (either rejecting it or applying it), thanks. 90.236.174.237 ( talk) 19:38, 26 March 2013 (UTC)
|
what is wrong with "Modern Germanic peoples are the Scandinavians ( Norwegians, Swedish, Danish, Icelanders, and Faroese), Germans (including Austrians and Sudeten Germans), Alemannic Swiss, Liechtensteiners, Luxembourgers, the Dutch, Flemings, Afrikaners, Frisians, the English and others who still speak languages derived from the ancestral Germanic dialects."? 95.196.171.69 ( talk) 20:19, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
IP, stop yelling at people, your stance is obviously not self-evident; there's an ongoing discussion about the scope of this article. If you continue to add the paragraph before consensus is reached, you will be blocked for edit warring. Choyoołʼįįhí:Seb az86556 > haneʼ 22:51, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
I think editors of this page should also comment at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Germanic peoples (modern) .-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 11:28, 27 March 2013 (UTC)
This discussion is closed. |
---|
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
Can someone please tell me where the Germanic DNA project has come from. Because it does not EXIST!. You can prove to the world, that I am wrong by putting a link up to a German DNA project from a GERMAN website _ie:.de. Here are some facts you should google: British Dna came from Spain . Links are below, English language did not exist until the late 12th century. Which the Normans brought from France to the present day England. Before that the majority of English people spoke and wrote in Latin, Roman, now Italian. Look at your old Latin writings and the cities old Latin names. Ireland, Scotland, Wales national Lanuague'es are Gallic( Define:Celtic some one who speaks a Celtic language) so when in past history where English people first called "Celts". Have a look it was first recorded in a 18th century book!. Sorry but the Celtic culture finished around(450AD?) and was part of the Iron age, not a race of people's. And as for the Vikings (define:seafaring warriors)later sometime after the 8th century they arrived in the British Isle's. What are you talking about a mass migration? Why? What? Where and When?. A few small tribes, most likely traders, and farmers migrated. Some in the past did come for plunder like the 300 boats from Denmark that raided York. No excuse my written English is not so good, and look how easy for me it is to use a internet search engine to find out about History. Also Poland, Russians, And the German Slav "Rani" tribe used Viking methods of the same era. But for Germany to admit they have a DNA project. I believe this will never happen because they had more Slav, west Slav, Slav, Bavaria Slavic, Germania Slavica, Sorbs, Wends, Obotrites, tribes than any other country. They did some very bad things in World war 2. And Yes, I have English ancestory more than you know!. Casurgis from Sydney links below. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2166573/Prehistoric-DNA-bones-cave-proves-English-originally-came-Spain.html http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14630012 http://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/mythsofbritishancestry/#.Ugi2QtKBlLg http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-406108/Ancient-Britons-come-mainly-Spain.html http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Celts http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-18489735 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-14630012 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_history_of_the_Iberian_Peninsula http://www.eupedia.com/forum/threads/25820-R1b-in-Iberian-Peninsula-France-and-the-British-Islands German Slav, Slavic, Slavia History http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limes_Saxoniae /info/en/?search=Polabian_Slavs http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wends http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rani_(Slavic_tribe) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pomeranians_(Slavic_tribe) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mieszko_I_of_Poland parts of Germany under polish control /info/en/?search=Glomacze /info/en/?search=Sorbs /info/en/?search=Dervan /info/en/?search=Wagri http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golensizi http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Slavs /info/en/?search=Bavaria_Slavica /info/en/?search=Lusatia German Slavic speakers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mecklenburg German Slavic speakers /info/en/?search=Chronicon_Slavorum /info/en/?search=Margraviate_of_Meissen German Slavic speakers /info/en/?search=Margraviate_of_Brandenburg German Slavic speakers http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_IV,_Holy_Roman_Emperor Parts of Germany under Czech, Roman empire control http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Germania_Slavica http://www.sachsen.de/en/276.htm READ ME! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.33.0.254 ( talk) 11:24, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
|
I can't edit the article. There's a "the" ("the the Norwegians") too much. -- Gabbahead. ( talk) 13:06, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
Done. Thanks for noticing the error. Dimadick ( talk) 06:55, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
The Persian nation contains a number of tribes as listed here. ... : the Pasargadae, Maraphii, and Maspii, upon which all the other tribes are dependent. Of these, the Pasargadae are the most distinguished; they contain the clan of the Achaemenids from which spring the Perseid kings. Other tribes are the Panthialaei, Derusiaei, Germanii, all of which are attached to the soil, the remainder -the Dai, Mardi, Dropici, Sagarti, being nomadic. —Herodotus, Histories 1.101 & 125 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.12.219 ( talk) 13:23, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard#Encyclopedia_of_European_Peoples -- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 20:11, 22 March 2013 (UTC)
WHART IS WRONG WITH THE CREATORS OF THIS RIDICULOUS CELTIC FANS LIES . GERMANIA IS FROM IRMINONES OF HIRMINONES THE FEDERACY OF GERMANIC PEOPLES,INCLUDING SUEBI AND HESSEN OR OTHERWISE KNOWN CHAUSSI — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.84.132.211 ( talk) 20:44, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Please fix Germania, Germaina Magna it's clearly shown that many Czech towns where part of Germania Magna and please look at the mountain ranges on the maps, Swiss alps, tatra mountains, Sudetes. Even Olomouc over in the North east of the Czech Republic had two different latin names (Iuliomontium,Roman fort (Mons Iulii). Also its a fact the the Blucina Sword from 5th century was found near Brno and from a germanic king. Czech cities located in Germanina Magna taken from Ptolemy's maps 2nd century AD located in present day Czech Republic. Furgisatis u České Budějovice, Meliodunum in the sand, Strevinta for Hříměždic to the West of Sedlčany, Casurgis is Prague, Redintuinum u Loun, Nomisterium in Litoměřice, Hegetmatia in Mladá Boleslav, Budorgis in Cologne, Coridorgis in Jihlava, Eburum u Hrádku is Znojmo, Parienna in Breclav, Eburodunum is Brno, Setuia at Komořan near Vyškov, Felicia is Vyškova, Asanca is Kojetína, Carredunum is Rýmařov I have supplyed many links below to verify.
Atilla the Hun never went through Czech lands. Do your own research he went up the Danube ( Germany, Austria) and the Rhine West Germany, France) and he was killed in France(Gaul) in 454AD. Also its a fact that the Blucina Sword from 5th century was found near Brno(Latin:Eburodunum) and was from a Germanic king. Two gold Germanic swords of the same type have been found in present day central Germany located in Pleidelsheim and Villingendorf. Look at the links above and make your own opinion. And then decide if an Americian writer(Note: Americia was and will always be a former British and English colony)who wrote a 20th century book about European history when he or she has never ever been to Europe. Note Americia did not exist in the middle ages only native Indians lived there before 15th century. Casurgis from Australia is watching 12.07.2014 And yes I am part English. The Mythicial Saxons are from here: http://www.sachsen.de/en/276.htm and: http://www.sachsen-anhalt.de/lang/english/history-politics/history/ . You still believe that there was a mass migration??. All your old documents from 5th century in Britannia where in Latin and you where mostly Christians. Germania Magna where Pagans as even your Danish vikings were: http://denmark.dk/en/society/history/ to the late 10th century. Remember your King Alfred from the 8th century went to Rome to be crowned king: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/dominicselwood/100255437/king-alfred-was-a-roman-catholic-lets-bury-him-in-westminster-cathedral/ .Forgive me i was not taught this at school but at least I am capable to still learn and educate myself except for my bad grammer and spelling. Thou knows nothing!. Casurgis out — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.32.240.50 ( talk) 02:44, 12 July 2014 (UTC)
The first I note FIRST German king was Charlemange of the 8th century!. So old English was latin as ins Bede's writtings, to King William of 1066 the dooms day book just to name a few examples. German did not exist in the 5th century it is IMPOSSIBLE!. So please if OLD English existed before the 13th century NORMANS that brought it to England. Please show some evidence. Also northen Germany near Holstein was part of Germany Magna, and they where not part of the Roman Empire, so they where not belivers of Christ. You need to do some research and stop writing dishonest lies. Atilla the Hun went up the danube and rhine and was killed in France 454AD. Avars had bases in Hunguary and Bugaria in the 8,9th century. Who ever wrote this of low intelligence. So please show the world!. Ohh sorry I believe some else wrote some thing simlar but you keep deleting his comments. Propaganda machine is at work here — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.80.98.184 ( talk) 16:00, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
All you do is tell your lies here. Engish language did not exist until the Norman's( Orginally a tribe from Scandinavia) brought it over from present day France over sometime in the late 13th century. Facts are 1. German language did not exist until 8th century!. Why see ptolemy's maps from 2nd century AD, Germania (Mostly Roman, Christians and where latin speakers and writers, and Germania Manga which includes the area's of Schleswig-Holstein ( East and northern side, Non Christians, most likey did not speak latin). Charlemange was note: First German king in mid 8th century who started the use of the German language see Monk "Abogran". So how could these Anglo Saxon mythical tribes speak OLD ENGLISH when the German language did not exist in the 5th century its IMPOSSIBLE!. Attila the hun also traveled up the Danube and then the Rhine and was killed in Gaul (France) no where near the Angles. No Huns made it that far ever, And the later Avars around the 8th and 9th century had bases in Hungary and Bulgaria. Mongols in the 13th century also never made it to Schleswig-Holstein area. Please supply some artifacts some copies of the actual documents from 1000-1500 years ago. And shame me in front of the whole world. Also the slavic tribes see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limes_Saxoniae. Arrived in 9th century but yes all the Germanic and Germans tribes left for Britannia in the 5th century AD. My history is not the best but I believe only two unarmed Saxon tribes arrived by ship in the city of present day Wessex around 460,470AD but Saxony is near Czech Republic?. All English old documents like the dooms day book 1066, Bede the Monk, as example are in latin, all your churches before say the 16th century where all christian and later Catholic. I could go and on but you really should know better. OLD ENGLISH. Thou shall be quite now. https://www.google.com.au/search?q=germania+magna&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=VYZ5U5ziGcnikAWAsoG4DQ&ved=0CAYQ_AUoAQ&biw=1280&bih=684#q=magna+germania&spell=1&tbm=isch https://www.google.com.au/#q=britannia+latin+cities+names http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Latin_place_names_in_Britain ROMANS spoke and wrote in latin. SCHLESWIG HOLSTEIN WAS IN GERMANY MANGA they where not Christens like you!. OLD ENGLISH is mostly a latin based language
The article stated: Because of its comparative isolation and the heavy invasion by Germanic tribesmen from a part of northern Europe outside the reaches of Roman influence, Anglo-Saxon England was thoroughly Germanic and would remain more Germanic in culture than the rest of Europe through the greater part of the Middle Ages. John Blair argued that a good deal of what Tacitus wrote of the early Germans in the first century A.D. applies accurately to the Anglo-Saxons and that even their conversion to Christianity left much in their customs and outlook intact. [1]
I do not see any reason to believe why England (not even thinking of the strong Romanic and Celtic influences) should stay more Germanic - whatever that is - than, say, Norways. The references certainly do not make up for the strength of the claim. -- Zz ( talk) 14:06, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
The article indicates that during the iron age the Germanic people were spread east to the Vistula river. This is clearly contradicted by the current genetic evidence <Juras A, Dabert M, Kushniarevich A, Malmstro¨m H, Raghavan M, et al. (2014) Ancient DNA Reveals Matrilineal Continuity in Present-Day Poland over the Last Two Millennia. PLoS ONE 9(10): e110839. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0110839> and any archeological evidence needs to be very carefully checked to its source as it may be politically motivated. Whitecygent — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whitecygent ( talk • contribs) 12:47, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
Tacitus and Caesar are mentioned. Clearly they are the two main people who wrote about the Germans. However...For years now their accounts have been known as propaganda typical of Roman writings. The Romans often embellished or demonized peoples, with no relation to reality, depending on their political goal.
Tacitus & Caesar's accounts should be listed as a Roman account, nothing more.
Numerous objective research shows their accounts to be flawed. For instance, detailed analysis of DNA and other Germanic bodies in Germany, has definitely concluded that the diet of the Germans was not "exclusively milk, flesh, and cheese" as per Caesar, but an overwhelmingly vegetarian diet made of cereals!!! Probably the Romans ate more Cheese & flesh than the Germans!
It has also been proven through archeological research that Germania/Germany was highly agricultural and the German tribes were not nomadic but deeply sedentary, in a culture similar to the German culture of the middle ages. When the Germans moved...It was because of outside event.
The interesting bit is why the original tribes left Scandinavia to settle Germany. But once in Germany they stayed there and did not move until the Volkerwanderung. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:810D:E80:17E:BDB9:CF4:1217:E4C5 ( talk) 17:54, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
The usage and primary topic of Varieties of German is under discussion, see talk:German dialects -- 65.94.43.89 ( talk) 05:08, 13 May 2015 (UTC)
Since when are Scots a Germanic people. They are a Celtic people. Some will say that they speak English and have Germanic influence. Of course. What about Jamaicans then? Pipo.
If this is becoming a major job, and requiring "harsh" tagging, then I still wonder how clear the evidence is that WP copied from the website rather than the other way around. I have no look closely by the way, but am very thankful that you have made this effort!-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 10:33, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
First of all we should all thank Obenritter for the efforts being made of late on this article. Small thing. I just noticed that in its current form the first sub-section of the History section is mainly about the Iron age and therefore repeated at the beginning of the next section in other words. Indeed the Iron age section also makes reference to previous periods.-- Andrew Lancaster ( talk) 10:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
In the first paragraph of the segment called 'Roman Empire period' there is mention of Damitian. Shouldn't it rather be Domitian? MartínezFlores ( talk) 19:36, 10 December 2015 (UTC)