Talk:Caledonians

message: Colin Reader should have been Dr. Colin Martin. The confusion may have been from his book a Reader in Scottish History.--Seàn B. 23:41, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: I had always been led to believe that the Picts weree a race apart, and the Caledonians were the British ancestors of the Strathclyders.  I know this is dealt with in the relevant section, but it's contentious and shouldn't be asserted in the introduction.
Mon Vier
:I don't think that's contentious (although there's plenty of contentious stuff in the article). The lands of the Caledonii were, if we are to believe Ptolemy, in Perthshire, which would make the Caledonians Picts from the 3rd century. As for the kingdom of Strathclyde, that was in the region where Ptolemy placed the Damnonii. Angus McLellan 23:25, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Picts/Caledonians

message: I am thinking the article should be merged with Caledonia. Laurel Bush 09:41, 17 August 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I could see it being merged with an article on the Caledonii themselves. Currently we are using Caledonia  to describe all of Scotland north of the Antonine Wall in many sources even though the Caledonii were one tribe amongst the Vacomagi, the Taexali and the Venicones all inhabiting the area. Many history books define Caledonia much more tightly and exclude these tribes, limiting Caledonia proper to the area around the Great Glen and a bit further southwards. I think we need to define how we are going to use Caledonia: in its poetic sense as a name for all Scotland, in the Roman historians' sense as a name for just northern Scotland or as the more precise sense as the land of the Caledonii. I will try to find out if anyone has any theories about which tribes made up the Confederacy. adamsan 14:50, 17 August 2005 (UTC)

text: What should it be then folks? The recent new edits have consolidated tribe and confederacy together, is this the way to go? I would argue with the new assertion that the Caledonians forced the Romans to abandon Scotland, there are other, much-discussed, factors to consider, as outlined in the Roman Britain article I think. A few points about Caledonian political organisation seem to have been lost in the recent changes and I do sense that some passages no longer represent the known sources, eg the use of 'resistance' as a term in areas that were not officially occupied and where an uprising and southward invasion is better historically attested. adamsan 22:52, 7 December 2005 (UTC)

text: I'd also like to point out that Google hits are not always an effective tool for deciding on an article topic. Caledonians can refer to a number of different modern organisations as Google clearly shows. The issue I feel about the Caledonian Confederacy was that it may be preferable to treat it separately, as a name given by historians to a losely defined group of tribes, whilst the Caledonii/Caledonians and the archaeological knowledge about their society could be better served under Caledonii. Thoughts
? adamsan 23:11, 7 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge article? 

message: Where did the Romans get the word "caledonii" from? --70.128.112.146 (talk) 17:20, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Caledonii 

message: I am no expert on the Caledonians and archealogy in this era but should this be added in the article ? Apparently some mummies nicknamed "Cherchen Man and Family ... of the ancient Caledonii tribe of central Scotland, have been unearthed in a burial site thousands of miles east ... They were found in the Taklamakan desert in the western Chinese region of Xinjiang.". Further, "The male mummy had hair of reddish brown, high cheekbones, a long nose, full lips and a ginger beard; hardly Oriental in any way. He stood six feet tall and was buried wearing a red twill tunic and tartan leggings. Even his DNA indicates that he was indeed Celtic in origin.". -GabaG (talk) 01:26, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Cherchen Man and Family

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Caledonians. 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/20061028202945/http://www.historyscotland.com/aboutus.html to http://www.historyscotland.com/aboutus.html
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:05, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Just coming across this article, due to a random bit of interest in this area, and it thoroughly confuses me.  From what I can work out, the term 'Caledonian' or 'Caledonians' can be used in any one of three ways, depending on context:
1)  To refer to a single, specific tribe of people that lived in what is now Scotland, in the Iron Age and Roman eras.
2)  To refer to a confederacy of several tribes that worked together, mainly to fight the Romans.
3)  To refer to anyone from 'Caledonia', the name, at the time, of what is now Scotland.
Is this correct?  If it is, then this should perhaps be made a bit clearer, as this is what I have worked out from what seem to be inconsistancies in the article, not from simply reading it. 91.125.150.123 (talk) 19:58, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Confusing 

message: "In AD 83 or 84, led by Calgacus, the Caledonians' defeat at the hands of Gnaeus Julius Agricola at Mons Graupius is recorded by Tacitus. Tacitus avoids using terms such as king to describe Calgacus."
Tacitus also avoids using the word 'Caledonian.' The people defeated by Agricola at Mons Graupius are described as Brittani.
JF42 (talk) 06:56, 20 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  "led by Calgacus, the Caledonians" 

message: I've added a good amount of information to each section of the article. I will be keeping an eye out for any action here so if anything sticks out as entirely incorrect feel free to correct it. I hope this proves to be a useful and informative addition. -Ford AJ (talk) 22:32, 9 April 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Information Addition