Talk:Hallstatt culture

message: The map apparently shows different shadings for the Halstatt, La Tene, and historic Celtic areas. But this is not clearly explained and which is which remains unclear. Can someone please add a key?
BTW, this article is refreshingly superior in writing and scholarly tone. That's in contrast with the chaos of the "Celts" article.Ftjrwrites (talk) 21:44, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What does map mean? 

message: Article succinctly mentions La Tene as perceived successor to Halstatt, but does not discuss the important issue of origins. Someone with access to appropriate source material should add a balanced entry on this matter, even if it's just a sentence or two. I seem to recall that the consensus is for the Corded Ware Culture, but there are complications with this identification.Ftjrwrites (talk) 21:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Preceding culture 

message: Illyria,The Illyrians, bearers of the Hallstatt cultureThe Illyrians, bearers of the Hallstatt culture.Megistias (talk) 16:36, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: it appears the culture reaches into Slovenia (Lower Styria). I was not aware of this. The "Illyrians" are probably supposed to be the bearers of the eastern zone, while the Celts were the bearers of the western zone (of course it wouldn't have been as clear-cut as that in reality). --dab (𒁳) 14:05, 23 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Many sources say "Encyclopedic Dictionary of Archaeology by Barbara Ann Kipfer,ISBN-10: 0306461587,2000, Page 251,"... Illyria extended from the Danube River southward to the Adriatic Sea and from there eastward to the Sar Mountains. The Illyrians, descendants of the hallstatt culture, were divided into tribes, each a self-governing community with a council of elders and a chosen leader. The last ...""
*descendants of the hallstatt culture, does this mean the hallstatt  culture map needs be expanded even more then to Slovenia? This means more of them? Megistias (talk) 19:44, 23 April 2008 (UTC)

text: ok, I've uploaded the map as it stands at present. I intend to refine it further. dab (𒁳) 11:06, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: The Hallstatt culture map will simply show the regions in which Hallstatt sites have been identified, yes? Will it follow contours of a relief map, not showing Hallstatt culture at the highest elevations? --Wetman (talk) 11:13, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: this is asking a bit much. The extent of the Hallstatt culture is informed by the distribution of individual finds. It should properly be a scatter plot of find locations. Good luck compiling that. Sure, high elevations probably won't have been "part" of the "culture", but if we start to leave holes in the distribution map for this, we'd also have to leave out the lakes etc., and we'll be making a stronger claim than warranted for the areas that remain coloured. Instead, we just need to base the map on published maps, and be aware of the intended implications, which is not that every pixel painted red is the location of an actual archaeological find. dab (𒁳) 16:04, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

text: You're right: that was asking a bit much.--Wetman (talk) 18:14, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Illyria and the The Illyrians, bearers of the Hallstatt culture 

message: The phrase "(note 'halen' is salt in Modern Welsh)" seems to be a massive non-sequitur here. It may have some relevance, and I'm not qualified to judge (I came here on a wiki-clicki-trip) but surely it should go in a separate section if it should even be here at all? This is the edit that added the line. --Rpeh•T•C•E• 01:30, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: A little bit astonished. When I visited the Hallstatt salt mine with its large halls, the guide emphasized the prominent role of salt mines and salt trade in the core area of the Hallstatt culture. (The French article tells the same.) The guide also told us, that the modern term 'hall' (German: Halle) derived from the antique (Celtic?) term for salt. Really wrong? Henrig (talk) 20:02, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Welsh? 

message: Since it's not in the bibliography, "Kossack (1959)" needs some identifying.--Wetman (talk) 19:41, 16 October 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Kossack 1959" 

message: :I'm sure there's more out there, but in terms of presenting the idea, this is all I have time for. Good luck and I hope this helps. Regards Wotnow (talk) 18:32, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks a lot. I hope someone will create a new map by using this reference. --Eleassar my talk 19:02, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: 'Saright. It's probably about time I checked out the map-making editors/projects, from where we may be able to enlist some help. Regards Wotnow (talk) 20:50, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Good map - make sure to include Segovia in southern Portugal where Hallstatt stamped pottery appears around 800 BC - some people are finding it hard to accept that they went so far so early but these are the firm dates (see Gamito).Jembana (talk) 21:30, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Cheers. I have now created a request for graphics assistance at the Wikipedia:Graphic Lab/Map workshop. Does the book's map cover the area you mention? If not we'll need a reference to help either with graphics, or at least information to help get the graphics right. Regards Wotnow (talk) 21:52, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: In figure 6 here Gamito has a nice map of Hallstatt stamped pottery distibution and mentions in detail areas of Portugal and Spain as well as Cornwall and western Britain which are not on Piggot's map in the text on the left of the map and in the timelines and maps above this figure which deal with the Iberian peninsula in relation to Hallstatt settlement or cultural expansion. I would say take Piggot's map as a base and augment it with the archaelogical evidence distribution in Gamito's work - requires only a slight extension in Iberia and Britain and maybe Italy too I'd say from her text.Jembana (talk) 23:39, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: A ref

message: Is it known what mitochondrial and Y haplotypes did the people of this culture have?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.181.233.232 (talk) 15:31, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: No remains were tested. The majority of researchers think that their language was donated by Y-haplogroup R-M420 and that when expanding west they were they assimilated huge sums of R-M269. Those R-M269 who were not assimilated by them and later other IE are the Basques. I agree with this scenario. YOMAL SIDOROFF-BIARMSKII (talk) 17:10, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text:  Thank you for the genetic information, which unfortunately is always written in a very wooden style. Please avoid the standard beginning "A genetic study ... in journal", which is unnecessary, and start with the main author instead. Thank you.HJJHolm (talk) 13:30, 26 June 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Genetics 

message: There is no antecedent for "this" in this phrase.
"It is probable[11][12][13] that some if not all of this diffusion"
100.15.127.199 (talk) 13:30, 7 July 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  non sequitur 

message: Hopefully someone will find the time to rewrite this section.  It is definitely not the case that any of the Fürstensitze (princely centres) are 'typical' Hallstatt Culture settlements, let alone the Heuneburg (largest site of the period by far, and nowadays proposed as a possible town): they are called Fürstensitze precisely because they are not typical.European Prehistorian (talk) 16:58, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: tweaked a bit. More could be done. Johnbod (talk) 21:24, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Settlement section 

message: The redirect Hallstat has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at  until a consensus is reached.  1234qwer1234qwer4 21:31, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  "[[:Hallstat]]" listed at [[Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion|Redirects for discussion]] 

message: Hallstatt culture is often linked with Celtic speakers in archaeology and is one of the arguments for western movement from Central Europe of early Celts. But as Patrick Sims-Williams notes:
‘Celtic’ is rightly regarded as a misleading label for the central European Hallstatt and La Tène material ‘cultures’ of the Late Bronze Age and Iron Age (Renfrew 1987, 240; Sims-Williams 1998a). The peoples of the first millennium bc who spoke the attested languages which meet the philological criteria for Celticity—certain unique divergences from reconstructed Proto-Indo-European—corresponded encouragingly well in their distribution to the historically attested Celts, Galatians, Celtiberians, and so on, while corresponding poorly to the ‘archaeological Celts’ deduced from Hallstatt and La Tène archaeology.
(…)
If a linguistic label really had to be attached to the ‘eastern Hallstatt culture’, Anreiter's ‘Eastern Alpine Indo-European’ would be preferable both to ‘Celtic’ and even more so to ‘Germanic’ (…)
Then David Stifter completely rejects the 19th century Celtic etymology for the placenames in hall- (like Hallstatt), also claiming that they’re generally rejected in linguistics (as they’re untenable, there’s no s > h sound change in Continental Celtic, the hall- places are in medieval Germanic-speaking areas and not at all in other parts of the Celtic world, and the derivation from ‘salt’ would require a non-geminated ll).
So I think the article should be edited to add more context about the doubts about any connection between the Hallstatt archaeological culture and Celtic speakers. Right now it reads as if this connection was still a fairly strong consensus and default assumption. It definitely is not common among historical linguists involved in Celtic.
Silmethule (talk) 13:51, 28 January 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: The article uses pretty tentative language around linguistic issues, but perhaps more needs adding. Johnbod (talk) 16:00, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Celticity of Hallstatt