Talk:Eburones

Classical Greece and Rome Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Celts Mid‑importance

	Eburones is within the scope of WikiProject Celts, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the ancient Celts and the modern day Celtic nations. 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.CeltsWikipedia:WikiProject CeltsTemplate:WikiProject CeltsCelts articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Gaul Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Gaul, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Gaul on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.GaulWikipedia:WikiProject GaulTemplate:WikiProject GaulGaul articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Belgium Mid‑importance

	Belgium portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Belgium, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Belgium on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BelgiumWikipedia:WikiProject BelgiumTemplate:WikiProject BelgiumBelgium-related articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ethnic groups Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ethnic groups, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles relating to ethnic groups, nationalities, and other cultural identities on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ethnic groupsWikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groupsTemplate:WikiProject Ethnic groupsEthnic groups articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Ethnic groups open tasks:

Here are some open WikiProject Ethnic groups tasks:

Meta-tasks:
- Place the {{Ethnic groups}} template on the talk page of articles within the scope of this project.
- Resolve the disparity in importance rankings among different ethnic groups
Articles about ethnic groups that currently have issues needing resolution:
Start an article:
- Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic groups/Article requests

Feel free to edit this list or discuss these tasks.

Etymology[edit]

The etymology section looks spurious ideed:

The etymology of Eburon is thought to be: eibe, eebe + bauer, boer(en)(=plural). "Eibe, eebe" = yew. "Bauer, boer" = farmer. So: yew farmers. Yew was (is) the best wood to make bows. The best yew is grown upon sandy soils, where growth is slow and the wood more fibrous. The Latin word for yew is taxus. The Romans called the region: Taxandria, later Toxandria (yew-land). The yew from the region had such a good reputation that the Gauls had a special word for it: eburo.

The Proto-Germanc name for the yew was actually *īwaz. Wouldn't *eburaz ("boar") be a more likely etymology for the Eburones?--Berig (talk) 16:01, 5 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The inclusion of Bauer in the etymology seems unsourcable to me. Yew is certainly a well respected theory and I know that boar also occasionally gets mentioned. We should go with whatever sources say.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 09:40, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But now I notice the above remark is very old and no longer relevant to the article.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 10:07, 5 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

notes for further work[edit]

Localization.

Royman sees archaeological evidence for cultural centres near 's Hertogenbosch and the Maas. But Caesar reports that the Menapii had settlements stretching to this general area.
Pauly, which we now cite, describes them as living mainly between Maas and Rhine, which is what Caesar said. It also makes it sound like they stretched all the way to the Eifel. Reviews of the literature such as by Wightman however remark that German sources tend to prefer this, whereas non-German sources understand Caesar as implying their homeland also had a significant part west of the Maas.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 19:40, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, we could work together on this article. I know there is a small duplication issue between the sections /name/ and /language/, but I will address it. Alcaios (talk) 19:44, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, once identified, such things should be reasonably easy for us.

To consider. Perhaps the "genocide" theme of Roymans is notable/ worthwhile/ useful to use. See https://www.academia.edu/12866878/Fire_and_Sword._The_archaeology_of_Caesar_s_Gallic_War--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 21:21, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

source template in bibliography[edit]

I see the Smith template was added in 2007 in this edit [1]. I wonder if it is still relevant to any of our text today?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 12:19, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not relevant I think. Alcaios (talk) 12:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

language section shorten and move?[edit]

I mentioned this section before, but it is not that I have a clear idea of where it should go.

Move after Name section because related?
It could be argued that it should be reduced? (Main = Germani Cisrhenani? OTOH Eburones are often discussed separately e.g. Royman)--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 11:58, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The section could be renamed /Identity/ (or /Culture/) and moved after /Name/. It also needs to be trimmed down (see perhaps Sotiates#Culture as an example of what could be done). Alcaios (talk) 12:16, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

At the moment it is mainly about language itself, so let's start with moving and shortening. I will already look at that article though.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 13:41, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What about working in a draft first? I have started to write stuff, but it's difficult to merge everything before the whole section is finished: User:Alcaios/Eburones Alcaios (talk) 14:24, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever is easiest. I have already moved it though, and made a few small changes. We could probably just work on the article? I can leave it to you first?--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 15:08, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

paragraph[edit]

@Alcaios: Probably you are still working on this:

According to a description given by Caesar (mid-1st century BC), the greatest part of the Eburones lived between the Meuse and Rhine rivers.[38] However, Caesar also notes that their land bordered on that of the coastal Menapii in the north, and that those among the Eburones "who were nearest the ocean" managed to hide in islands after their defeat against the Romans.[39] Another part of the Eburones also fled to a remote area of the Ardennes, where Ambiorix himself is said to have gone with some cavalry.[40] This [note: this no longer refer to the preceding sentence] apparent geographical situation, north of Crondroz and near the Rhine-Maas delta, has suggested to many scholars that a significant part of their territory stretched west of the Meuse rather than between the Meuse and the Rhine.[41][42][43] In another passage, [note:the following description has no clear connection to the preceding discussion, because it is not noted that Caesar sent people to chase Eburones at this river.] Caesar portrays the Scheldt river (Scaldis) as flowing into the Meuse, confusing the river with the Sambre,[44] leading scholars to argue that Caesar or later copyists sometimes confused river names or used them differently than later writers.[45][46]

I just post here while you are working.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 10:25, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think I have fixed the issue with the last edit, thanks Alcaios (talk) 10:40, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Eifel theory[edit]

@Alcaios: I noticed your edsum. I don't have a strong position on whether to keep it but I get the feeling the theory is still respected or otherwise our secondary sources would not still be arguing against it. Apparently the theory is more commonly held in Germany and I have not double checked if we can really say it is disappearing. The practical danger with not mentioning recently discounted theories is that someone else can insert them in a messy way later.--Andrew Lancaster (talk) 13:39, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]