Talk:List of ancient Italic peoples

Missing tribes
Shouldn't the Caeninenses, Crustumini, Antemnates and Sabines also be part of this list? Echo 48 (talk) 15:58, 17 February 2013 (UTC)

This article is badly conceived
First, this article should be retitled as "List of historic pre-Roman peoples of Italy", since it reflects only those nations and tribes attested between ~800 BCE and ~200 BCE. The peninsula has been inhabited by humans at least since 120,000 BCE, and by farmers/shepherds at least since 7000 BCE; so there is a "little" gap in its coverage of "ancient peoples".

Second, there is no reason to limit the coverage to peoples speaking the "Italic" branch of Indo-European languages, or even to speakers of Indo-European languages. Besides that purely linguistic questonable classification (it is still disputed whether those languages were a single branch or several), there are no other features (biological, cultural, social, political, religious, ...) that would unifiy those "Italic" peoples and set them apart from the "non-Italic" ones.

Proposal
The list in this article is merely a subset of the List of ancient peoples of Italy. There is no advantage in having a separate list just for those nations/tribes/ethnic groups who are believed to have spoken "Italic" languages. If nothing else, because the classification of several languages are not known, and the "Italic branch" itself may be a fiction without real linguistic substance. --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 22:20, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

Discussion
Yea. In terms of consolidation, this article should be merged. Someone please mark it to be merged. -JS


 * Oppose - This article lists peoples on an ethnolinguistic basis. List of ancient peoples of Italy lists peoples on a geographic basis. This list would therefore on the contrary be a subset of a hypothetical List of ancient Indo-European peoples, which does not exist. Instead, we have articles like List of ancient Celtic peoples and tribes, List of ancient Slavic peoples and tribes, List of ancient Iranian peoples, List of ancient Baltic peoples and tribes, List of ancient Germanic peoples and tribes etc. As there is no significant overlap, the nomination fails WP:MERGEREASON. The nominator promotes the fringe theory that the existence of Italic languages "may be a fiction without real linguistic substance". As the nomination appears to have been motivated by fringe views, i cannot support it. Krakkos (talk) 13:28, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
 * "Ethnolinguistic group" does not mean merely "a bunch of people who speak related languages". The people must ALSO be an an ethnic group. There is no evidence that the "Italic peoples"  were an ethnic group.  On the contrary,  we know from the historic sources that they were divided into tribes that often went to war against each other. And the view that the "Italic languages" may be two branches of IE that split outside Italy is neither my own "original research" nor "fringe theory".  Check the modern sources; that is where I got the idea from. --Jorge Stolfi (talk) 10:25, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Which sources say that the "Italic languages" may be two branches of IE that split outside Italy? And how does that make the "Italic branch" itself [...] a fiction without real linguistic substance? Joshua Jonathan  - Let's talk!  11:05, 21 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Oppose - "may be a fiction" is not a serious argument. Joshua Jonathan  - Let's talk!  19:46, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Check the modern linguists. They talk of two separate branches, maybe more (e.g. Venetic). — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jorge Stolfi (talk • contribs) 21 May 2019 (UTC)


 * Oppose for points made above. Barjimoa (talk) 08:52, 3 December 2019 (UTC)