Talk:Armorica

message: Please, can you never use, the word of "Gaul", to speak about ARMORICA.
It's the most great mistake of 90% of the historians with a roman mind, not very busy to write the true, and often priests or officers in the Catholic Apostolic Roman Church. This wrong name of "GAUL" is given by the invader Jules Caesar during his military conquest of CELTIE, AQUITANIA, and ARMORICA, for the french part. No "Gaul" in these celtic countries. It's the same for the word "Gaulish". We havn't never been Gaulish, only in the imagination of stupid historians who never want to learn the CYMRIC language and just to crush the Armorican culture. You don't know that all the books past by the censorship, surpervised by the church or the politic of franks kings?
16 centuries of errors and mistakes it's enough!
ARMORICA, at 600 years BC, was not only the actual Brittany, but this important Cynmric confederation of some 20 armorican tribes was composed with : ANJOU, BRITTANY, MAINE, NORMANDY, PERCHE and TOURAINE. These 6 regions of France formed the Confederation of ARMORICA, a little like the existing model of HELVETIA.
Thanks you to correct your article full of errors, or go deeper in your study about my Land on the Sea. That will be the time to restore and reestablish the truth in the historical facts. The word of a conqueror is not the truth of the people who has been slated by thousands and who has hold out against the invader during 500 years.
A last thing; BRITTANIA (latin word again) = GREAT-BRITAIN (ENGLAND was LLOCGYR), and "BRYTHON" is a Cymric plural word that means "THE WARRIORS", not and never "BRITTONS" or "BRETONS". So Please work your subject before to go on to diffuse wrong interpretations of the history.
HOMINN, Arvorig prydydd, write Monday 23 june 2008. 
----  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.25.1.139 (talk) 18:39, 23 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Another of a similar type has selected a sentence he didn't like from within Henig's sourced quote and subtracted it, with the edit summary: "sounds bogus, uncited". This is incompetent. We need more adult supervision at this article.--Wetman 10:34, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: untitled

message: For the applicable map in the article (since I apparently can't copy & paste it directly here), is there any chance that someone can reassign its color coding so that it is applicable to the populations that it is referring to?
Map of the Gallic people of modern Britanny :
  Osismii
  Veneti
  Coriosolites
  Redones
  Namnetes
If anyone can do that, it would help increase the sensibility of the article... Regards... Stevenmitchell (talk) 23:56, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Maps & Their Color Coordinates

message: In my study of ancient astronomy and myth, I was directed to this website some years ago.</http://www.oocities.org/stoahist/SeaPeople.htmlref>. I recommend anyone interested in the subject of Armorica to review the website.  In particular and quite simply, it holds that ancient copper mines have been located in the Great Lakes regions of the United States and Canada.  The "outdated page" includes some interesting (to put it mildly) interpretations of "The Argonauts" which led the author Michael Busch to the location of some of the sites, which included some hengelike astronomical alignments etc. 
  The notion that Americas were "rediscovered" after some period of isolation--perhaps due to a mini-ice-age for instance, is gaining in popularity.  In another source, Barry Fell author of "America BC" among others, would back up arguments in favor of the existence of Europeans in the Americas going back several millennia--would very much support Michael Busch's assertions.  Fell bases his own work the discovery of Ogam writing (also spelled "Ogham" on the web) found throughout North and South America.  Fell explains that archaeologists in the Americas overlooked this writing because epigraphy is not taught as a part of the academic curriculum--whereas in Europe, where Ogam alphabets are a well recognized and well documented form of writing.  In early colonial days, experts determined perhaps mistakenly, that these writings were caused by plowshares. <ref>Fell, Barry. America BC: Celts Ancient Settlers in the New World. New York: Demeter Press, 1976. Print 
   I will add this.  I have noticed at times a rather trivial treatment of works such as these, that run contrary to current assumptions.  For instance, in the Wikipedia biography of Barry Fell, a comment is cited that at first seems to fully call into question Fell's handling of the interpretation of a location in West Virginian where some of this Ogam writing has been found.  
'David H. Kelley, an archaeologist at the University of Calgary who is credited with a major breakthrough in the decipherment of Mayan glyphs, complained about Fell in a 1990 essay: "Fell's work [contains] major academic sins, the three worst being distortion of data, inadequate acknowledgment of predecessors, and lack of presentation of alternative views." In the same essay, however, Kelley went on to state that "I have no personal doubts that some of the inscriptions which have been reported are genuine Celtic ogham." Kelley concluded: "Despite my occasional harsh criticism of Fell's treatment of individual inscriptions, it should be recognized that without Fell's work there would be no [North American] ogham problem to perplex us. We need to ask not only what Fell has done wrong in his epigraphy, but also where we have gone wrong as archaeologists in not recognizing such an extensive European presence in the New World."[10]'
So Kelley at first dismisses Fell's rather remarkable interpretation, but I wonder if he was introduced to the interpretation outside of the context presented in the book.  I have not read other works by Barry Fell to this date, but it is an understatement to say that Fell should be recognized for introducing the "ogham" problem to scholars.  America BC is well worth reading, and to return to the topic of Armorica supports the provocative idea that the Bronze age was fueled by copper from the Great Lakes. SvetAustin if 6were9 (talk) 20:05, 18 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  additional source 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Armorica. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090419084640/http://www.history-compass.com:80/images/store/HICO/chapters/523.pdf to http://www.history-compass.com/images/store/HICO/chapters/523.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 07:25, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified