Talk:Villanovan culture

message: Whoever expands this, don;t forget the Iron Age box, which you can find under Villanovan culture. Right now there is no room for it.Dave (talk) 00:33, 6 April 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Box

message: On a scale of 1 to 10 with 10 needing the most work, this is a 10. Specifically there is a sharp distinction between Villanovan and Proto-Villanovan, the culture ranges over the whole of Italy, Kossinna's Law does not apply (they are not the Etruscans or any one ethnic group) and the views of Pallottino are not presented accurately. Ciao.Dave (talk) 08:01, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Accuracy

message: I was looking at this again. Actually, it is not really so bad. With the box and everything it seems to be getting better. I see just a few points. I know what I said about Kossinna's Law above and that is probably truer of the more disconnected cultures. In this particular case Villanovan is coterminous with Etruscan and has to be Etruscan, unless you say that the Etruscan language appeared suddenly. It is in fact treated in the textbooks now as Etruscan. The Pre-Pallotino views don't count any more on this. All the purely Etruscan cities begin with Villanovan cities, which leads to the second point. Proto-Villanovan is not Villanovan. Proto-Villanovan is Bronze Age; Villanovan is Iron Age. Of course the difference in many cases is only a few iron artifacts in a settlement that manufactures and sells bronze ones, but there is a difference in antiquity. Moreover, there is a problem defining Proto-Villanovan. The culture, which is Final Bronze Age, according to the CAH is only to be considered Proto-Villanovan in areas where it is associated with Villanovan; that is, in the Etruscan range. Otherwise, it does not coincide; a lot of FBA descends to Latial and other cultures. However, in Etruscan areas, it has to be Etruscan. That is the modern take. In areas such as Tarquinia there is a continuous sequence from the FBA and even before to the Etruscans there. A final point. The Celts were not in the Po Valley until they invaded it in the 4th century, unless individuals happened to move there. For formatting, well, the tag is perfectly correct. There is absolutely no lack of good scholarly references available on the Internet and a simple trip to the library will turn up those that are not available there, if you want to to do this article. You need the books 1990 and after. The writing is not bad at all. It just does not describe the modern situation. Luck.Dave (talk) 15:22, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Not so bad

message: The author of this "Britannica" article has a funny, or rather idiosyncratic, imagination of "Eastern Europe". In particular, the Urnfield culture is rather a Middle European phenomenon, as this is correctly described two paragraphs below. HJJHolm (talk) 09:24, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Urnfield culture of Eastern Europe 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Villanovan culture. 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 http://web.archive.org/web/20060515022132/http://www.comunediverucchio.it/museo/testo_villi.htm to http://www.comunediverucchio.it/museo/testo_villi.htm
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) 19:06, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The articles Villanova and Protovillanova partly overlap and even conteradict each other. It is urgently suggested to combine the knowledge.2003:DD:F1C:14A4:7C45:20BA:D11A:602D (talk) 08:26, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cintradiction