File talk:IllyricumAD6RomanConditionofTribes.png

not correct!
Liburni were not Venetic tribe, as well as Veneti were not Liburnians. You positioned Dalmatae into Classical Liburnia! They must go a lil bit to the south, check position of Salona city! Liburni go to the south too, to Classical Liburnia which is in the place where you positioned Dalmatae. Neither Iapodes were Venetic tribe. They were not in Istria, they were in the place where you positioned Liburnians! Dalmatae Celts or Celtized? What is this all about? What are your sources? Are you serious?
 * Hold your horses.The locations are at 6 AD after deportations and resettling by the Romans.This is basic stuff but data from each tribe was used as well.Some tribes were subtribes of other tribes.

Megistias (talk) 10:19, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Pannonia and Upper Moesia. A History of the Middle Danube Provinces of the Roman Empire. A Mocsy, S Frere,page 55,"In Chapter one it was seen that the Celticization of North Pannonia had already began in the 4th century bc.
 * Pannonia and Upper Moesia. A History of the Middle Danube Provinces of the Roman Empire. A Mocsy, S Frere,page 7
 * Pannonia and Upper Moesia. A History of the Middle Danube Provinces of the Roman Empire. A Mocsy, S Frere,page 26
 * Pannonia and Upper Moesia. A History of the Middle Danube Provinces of the Roman Empire. A Mocsy, S Frere,page 10,
 * Pannonia and Upper Moesia. A History of the Middle Danube Provinces of the Roman Empire. A Mocsy, S Frere,page 12,
 * Pannonia and Upper Moesia. A History of the Middle Danube Provinces of the Roman Empire. A Mocsy, S Frere,page 27,
 * The Oxford Classical Dictionary by Simon Hornblower and Antony Spawforth,2003,page 1106
 * The Oxford Classical Dictionary by Simon Hornblower and Antony Spawforth,2003,page 426
 * A dictionary of the Roman Empire Oxford paperback reference,ISBN-0195102339,1995,page 202,"contact with the peoples of the Illyrian kingdom and at the Celticized tribes of the Delmatae"
 * History of the Roman World: 753 to 146 BC by H. H. Scullard,2002,page 16: "... of healing. In the fourth century their culture became so Celticized that Polybius described the second-century Veneti as practically in- distinguishable ..."

No these locations are not correct neither in 6th century. Liburnians, Iapodes and Dalmatae were never alocated at all, physically. In the 6th century there was Gothic province "Liburnia" in the northern Liburnia (Antique) and not Liburnians dislocated! Also, Dalmatae were not dislocated just because a name of Liburnia dissappeared and previous Liburnian centres became Dalmatian cities. Dalmatians from 6th century were not Dalmatae from the 1st!!! Dalmatians in the 6th century were Romanized Liburnians, Dalmatae, Ardiaei and some others! Neither Iapodians went for a trip to the west. It's not serious all together, presented that way.

Celtization. Yes Veneti were heavily Celtized, but people to the east not really. There are pieces of Celtic culture found but these pieces only testified material exchange between neighbors (as it always is) and not assimilation which is the real meaning of Celtization. When I say Veneti I mean Veneti, not Liburnians. Celtic artefacts were almost completely absent in Liburnian culture. Today we consider that Celtic influence appeared only marginally in culture of some tribes, like Liburnians and Dalmatae. Even tribe of Iapodes was earlier considered to be a kind of Celtic-Illyrian admixture, but today we know that there were just a few Celtic settlements in their territory, while they (Iapodes) were just influenced by that culture (but not to degree to lose their ID) and not culturally or anthropologically assimilated.
 * what 6th century?.Megistias (talk) 11:13, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

6th century AD. Aha sorry I see, you mean 6 AD. But even in 6 AD these tribes were not dislocated. They never were.
 * They were, mentioned widely in bibliography and since you are changing your IP all the time you seem suspicious.Megistias (talk) 11:39, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Ha? I don't care about IP's. I'm an archeologist digging Liburnian graves for almost 30 yrs. In 2010 we are going to dig out Liburnian city of Asseria, just partially investigated until now. I'm a proffessional, I don't give 2 cents on what you think about me or anything. Suspicious? Hahaha Are you a secret police or what? To me all of you engaged in Wiki are suspicious by means of your knowledge. Can you explain to me how for example Liburnians werer dislocated? I'm an ear now! Or Dalmatians moved to the west? Hahaha There was a struggle between Liburnians and Dalmatians about 1 Liburnian city in the 1st BC, but that's all. It had nothing to do with the Romans. This city was Promona in the border between them. Practically Dalmatae conquered it which means that they just crossed the river and nothing else. They never spread to Liburnian territory. Etc etc
 * Dont bother me pleaseMegistias (talk) 11:52, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Bother you? Are you serious? You bother all scientific community by drawing a map like this one.

Yes. THis map is tottally incorrect. Only Pannonia was significantly Celticised, and even there not 100 %. TO speak of Celticization in the middle of Drina basin and further toward the coast it a blatant error. This map should be removed Hxseek (talk) 05:55, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I have changed the legend for sometime as (as a more neutral "celtic influence") and will make more correctionsMegistias (talk) 12:42, 16 February 2010 (UTC)