Talk:Britons (historic)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project's talk page. |
| NB: Assessment ratings and other indicators given below are used by the Project in prioritizing and managing its workload. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's importance scale. |
 |
After rating the article, please provide a short summary on the article's ratings summary page to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses. |
|
WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:
|
|
 |
This article is supported by WikiProject England, an attempt to build a comprehensive guide to articles relating to England on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article associated with this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion. |
 |
Britons (historic) is within the scope of WikiProject Celts, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Celts. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article or you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks or take part in the discussion. Please Join, Create, and Assess. The project aims for no vandalism and no conflict. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's quality scale. | |
| ??? | This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the Project's importance scale. | |
 |
After rating the article, please provide a short summary on the article's ratings summary page to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses. | |
[edit] This article is complete rubbish!
What is meant with 'Acient Britons' is the people that lived in the British Isles at the end of the stone-age and the early bronze-age, the people that built Stonehenge!
What this article is about is the Celts who replaced (And probably massacred) the 'Ancient Britons'and still populated this land when the Romans conquered it.
See: List of famous Britons: These are all Celts, not Britons!
The two have been mixed before, but usually by eight year old schoolboys!
This is the kind of article that gives Wikipedia a bad name and makes it the mock of scholars! 81.245.170.150 00:31, 19 March 2007 (UTC)
Au contraire. The article struck me as quite scholarly. I'd always thought the Britons were Celts. Please quote the sources that lead you to be so rude about the article. Millbanks (talk) 21:27, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Brython not in scholarly use
According to this link, the word Brython is, in both of its senses, "No longer in scholarly use", Support, therefore, merge with Briton. Vilcxjo 18:01, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Merge discussion at Briton
See here for main discussion.Alun 11:26, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Why only souther three-quarters of Great Britain?
Can we have a source for this:
Brython and Brythonic are terms which refer to the indigenous, pre-Roman, Celtic inhabitants of the southern three-quarters of the island of Great Britain, south of the Forth and Clyde, and their language
This seems to be contradicted by this from later in the stub:
These terms specifically refer to speakers of the P Celtic branch of the Celtic languages as opposed to speakers of Q Celtic, who are usually referred to as Gaels or Goidelic Celts
What I'm getting at is this, a Brython is someone who speaks a Brythonic language according to this dictionary, and according to the Picts article It remains uncertain whether or not we should classify the Picts as Celts, although most available placename evidence tends to support the hypothesis that they spoke a Brythonic language, so why does it state that Brython only refers to the southern three-quarters of the island of Great Britain? I think that, for the sake of neutrality the article should at least state that there is some doubt as to whether Brithonic languages were spoken all over the island. I do not know the source of the information from the Pict article, the article has a large References section, but there are no reference tags in the body of the text. Likewise there is no source for your statement here. Alun 03:05, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
- Sorted. Please note that Brythonic territory extended north of the Forth and Clyde: which is how Dumbarton got its name, as well as the Manaw Gododdin being up in the Stirling area....dave souza 11:58, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Britain or British Isles?
Quote: The word Brython was borrowed from the Welsh language to differentiate between this purely ethno-linguistic meaning and the word Briton, which now refers to citizens of the United Kingdom. Its source comes from the terms Bruthin or Priteni used in classical times for inhabitants of the British Isles.
Question: It is not clear from the article that Ireland is not included as one of the British Isles. In the readers' minds, it may be. Were the Irish of classical times not Hibernians or Gaels or Scots rather than Britons or even Brythons, except in as far as the Irish raiders had been assimilated? (RJP 09:38, 14 January 2006 (UTC))
- In the mind of who you're talking to, it may or may not be, even in (cough: Ulster) certain parts of Ireland. See British Isles (terminology). As the Historical aspects section of that article points out, The Greeks called the British Isles Pretaniké and the Romans initially called Great BritainBritannias or Alba, and they called Ireland and other smaller islands Britanniae. After the successful invasion of CE 41 they called their province on the island of Great Britain Britannia(which province eventually covered roughly the same area as present-day England and Wales). The Romans then named Scotland Caledonia and Ireland Hibernia to differentiate them from the land that had been conquered — they never conquered either. More detail is given in British Isles#Origin of the term British Isles. ....dave souza 10:58, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] In the United States
What about those of us ethnic Britons living in and are citizens of the United States? There is a large number of us in Texas. (By Briton I refer to the people who are normally tall, pale red-heads orginating in the British Isles.)
- See Briton, A person who lists their ethnic group as British. There is not as yet a proper British people article, but there are English people, Welsh people and Scottish people articles. Alun 11:14, 1 May 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Territory
Can no more be said about the territory of the Brythons? At present, there's so much emphasis on where they bordered the Picts and Gaels, that one could be forgiven for assusming the Brythons lived only in what is now Scotland. Does anyone know of any studies on their territorial extent south of there? Or, to put it another way, do we know of anyone else living in Britain before the Romans apart from the Brythons, the Gaels and the Picts? Is there any evidence of any Germanic settlements that early in the east - I've heard people claim as much? And why restrict this to the pre-Roman era? The Brythons were neither wiped out nor entirely romanised by the end of the Empire. garik 18:10, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- Better? Feel free to expand on it. ... dave souza, talk 17:36, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The Britons
Requires DISAMBIGUATION. The Britons, an anti-Semitic organization and publisher, formed in 1919, and subsequently re-named or re-formed into The Britons Publishing Society, in 1920 took up the publication of the notorious plagiarism known as the Protocols of Zion.
- Ludvikus 16:00, 16 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Etymology
The etymology of "Britain" here given seems spurious - the cited page makes no mention, and the only other references I can find on the 'net (don't have any books handy) are mirrors of Wikipedia. Identical line in Bronze, removing both. - Somnior 21:23, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Pre-Celtic Speaking
What about the pre-celtic speaking Britons, they don't appear to be covered properly in the article. Gazh 15:06, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
This is an important point, but difficult to address. It depends in part on your/our chosen definitions. If we are talking about early "inhabitants of the British Isles" at the point where some or all of these people came to be termed Preteni or similar, then these were certainly "Britons" in one sense, but it's difficult to tie that in with the a date for when the inhabitants of those islands started speaking a Celtic language. Placename evidence from the Greek Geographers may give us some evidence of the dating of Celtic speech in Britain, but it is worth saying how this might be linked if indeed such is possible to dated usages of the priteni/pritani words. We should add something on these points, and especially on (any) linking between naming of peoples and linguistic evidence for celtic speaking.CecilWard (talk) 08:44, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Introduction needs a thorough review, with citations and definitions explained
The introduction needs a thorough rewrite by an expert in the field. The pervasive lack of citations, lack of explanation of the justification for the choice of definitions, imprecision and constant confusion between ethnicity and language, and imprecise periodization make the text less usable. I understand that an introduction needs to be kept brief, but the rest of the article is very scanty, and amplification of some of the issues of definition could and should be given in reasonable detail in the body of the article.CecilWard (talk) 09:17, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Etymology section needs cleanup
The section on etymology is unclear and partially off topic. Is it a discussion of the etymology of an English word? If so, which? The section should first etymologize the modern English word "Briton", but it does not do so. It does first talk about a word "brython" which I have never heard used by any English speaker. Of course the term "Brythonic" is indeed used in scholarly English writing, but that's a different matter which needs to be dealt with, but dealt with later. It is then appropriate to tackle the ancient attested terms pritani, pretani, brit(t)- etc. Whichever, the modern English word "briton" must be mentioned explicitly with a citation to a scholarly work on the English language, together with properly referenced discussion of the ancient terms, and the recent neologisms should be kept separate.CecilWard (talk) 09:17, 2 March 2008 (UTC)
