Talk:Ancient peoples of Italy

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Do the Italiotes actually belong in this list? I had thought the list was about the native peoples, while the Italiotes were the Greek colonists. -- Jonel | Speak 01:45, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)

I fixed the definition of the article. Alexander 007 04:56, 15 July 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Etruscans

I am surprized to see here Etruscans too. They were not italic. They were even not indoeuropean. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Eray (talk • contribs) 15:12, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Siculi, Sicani, Elimi...

I'm also not sure that these groups can be considered Italic. At very best their origins are debatable, if not explicitly non-Italic. As Italic means of or from Italy, the Sicani, thought to be from the Iberian peninsula, and the Elimi, thought to be from Asia Minor, cannot be included in this group. I suggest they be removed and added to a group more generally described as Mediterranean. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.21.108.226 (talk) 08:16, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

…It good that this is only a refrence colunm for my research today deal't with many ancient history properties and my memory this afternoon is short,though i think a read that wile Italy was just a placee of living and not yet perhaps a place in wich called italy it was a place in wich many had went to became a type or sort of kingship and or ruling ordeal,though about a certain period the ruling of just one over many and wich inlisted types as of lords whom were scattered about the erea to guide it and oversee it these persons were left to do so perhaps even through a generation or so for this happened when the single ruler did not have another to take his place ,may be a refrence as like the Lombards well after a while the forming and very large erea was at a jungle type degree many came and went and soon anough it was all over again through the capabilities of these warlords kept there place and the erea was still ruled by them,thus perhaps now who comes the native.

sometime history the way it mentioned and or paregraphed is so on tapt that nothing else matters ,nothing being the most important thing in the world would perhaps be search a bit more perhaps ,even as me for instance i know a little though reading my efforts are'nt as quite the forfillment as other's for the penmenship in all cases will continue to conquer even that word is question to it's spelling,well i'll continue to try till next time 3:18 p.m.e.s.t.David George DeLancey (talk) 20:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)