The recent discussions about the emptyness of "Germania" and what tribe settled where have inspired me to delve more into this topic and write a summary on some research I made a few months ago. If I have time and the reception is receiving, I might delve more into the regions that I haven't covered yet (Celts in Franconia and Thuringia, Germanic tribes in general).
I hope it might be useful for improving this game, @Trin Tragula @Arheo
The Boian Confederation in "Boihaemium"
(I'm going to use the following definitions: Boihaemium: land of the Boii, Bohemia: land of the state starting from the early modern period [Bohemia proper and Moravia as its constituencies])
The northern Boii are a quite elusive Celtic tribe, and are located in a region called Boihaemium by late ancient authors. This name is based on Germanic tribes naming this region after the Boii, but, at this point in time, the Boii had already deserted their former lands. This has raised concerns by some authors (Das Wandern ist der Boier Lust? Quellenkritische Überlegungen zur Ethnizität latènezeitlicher Gruppen im mittleren Donauraum, Peter Trebsche, 2015; Střední evropa na prahu historie – keltové v písemných pramenech, Jan Kysela, 2011) that the Boii might have never settled in Bohemia and only around Bratislava in the so called Boian Desert, whose localisation is possible through written sources. Commonly accepted facts about the Boii are
Nevertheless, the Celtic populace in Bohemia shared a material culture with the area around Bratislava. This has led to coining the name, "Boian coinage region", as they can be attributed to Boihaemium. It's also very likely that this region couldn't be ruled by one ruler, so that it's assumed to be a confederation with similar features, which colonised Bohemia proper, Moravia and southern Silesia in the 4th century BC. This region started trading with the Norici and Taurisci before the Oppida period, but most of the findings are dated into this period (Boii - Taurisci, MPK 85, 2015).
Oppida in Bohemia (Zur Oppidaforschung in Böhmen und Mähren, Vladimír Salač, 2009)
Extent of the Boii culture in the late 2nd century and 1st century BC; dots indicate where Knotenringe have been found (Boii - Taurisci, MPK 85, 2015)
The area of this Boian confederation encompassed the region around Bratislava (Boian Desert) and southern Silesia, which were both lightly colonised in the late 4th century BC and, starting from around 270 BC, a bigger influx happened (Archäologische Untersuchungen zu den Migrationsbewegungen der Keltenin ausgewählten Regionen zwischen dem Donaugebiet und Kleinasienwährend der Früh- und Mittellatènezeit, Lucia Raphaela Moiné, 2009). There were also settlers in modern-day Straubing (excavations there show that the region was abandoned in the beginning of the 4th century BC, but settled by immigrants from Bohemia in the later 4th century; those immigrants lived there, at least partially, for 250 years; Kelten und Germanen in Straubing, Claudia Tappert, 2004). The influence of the Boii extended over some parts of Pannonia over the years.
Whether or not the Boii were related to the Italian Boii is highly disputed. Because the name means warrior, it might have been a very popular one, so that the name similarity might be related to a coincidence.
Boihaemium was settled even before the expulsion of the Italian Boii. This has lead to some authors assuming that the Boii were united earlier on, but split into a Bohemian and an Italian part in between the 600 and 400 BC.
To sum it up:
In a game like Imperator, it's not possible to represent this ambiguity, so it's necessary to decide. As I've pointed out there was a Celtic population in Boihaemium, so calling and including this tribal confederation Boii would make sense. Possibly, their starting tribal loyalty could be lowered to represent its decentralisation.
Vindelicia and Raetians
At the moment, there are several Vindelician tribes in the game, but there are some other known ones that aren't yet. We know of 8 (or more depending on whether or not some tribes are associated with the Norici or the Raeti) from the Tropaeum Alpium (VINDELICORVM GENTES. QVATTVOR. COSVANETES. RVCINATES. LICATES. CATENATES.), whereby the VINDELICORVM GENTES. QVATTVOR. aren't specified here. From various other ancient sources we know about two out of those four that they, the Briganti and Estiones, settled around and north-east of Lake Constance (the settlements there are confirmed by excavations, c. Bevor die Römer kamen. Späte Kelten am Bodensee, Urs Leuzinger, 2009). The Leuni are mentioned to the west of the Cosuanetes by Ptolemaios in his Geographia, II.12,4 (3). (Runicates: most northern part of Vindelica, below: Leuni/Deuni and Consunates, below: Benlanes/Genaunes, below: Breuni). Furthermore, Strabo wriote about the Licates that the Norici live to their north, while they are often presumed to be located at the river Lech based on their name. This leaves one of the four tribes unnamed. That Norican tribe to the Licati's north might have been the Alaunes, as a sancutary consecrated for the gods Bedaios and Alounae has been found in the vicinity of Bedaium (today's Seebruck).
It's also known that southern Bavaria was continously inhabited from way before 300 BC up until the Romans came in 15 BC, and that the Upper Palatinate and Franconia (exception: region norht of Würzburg) were mostly abandoned and only sparsely populated in the 4th century BC; only later on, Oppida were founded there (Bayerns Kelten – die armen Vettern im Osten?, Markus Schußmann, 2012).
Also the Sevaces might be just an error by Ptolemaios, as their name is quite similar to the Saevates. According to the museum of St. Lorenzen the Saevates lived around St. Lorenzen (Southern Tyrol) throughout the early iron age and gave Sebantum (St Lorenzen) its name. They also appear paired together with the Laianci in an inscription to honour Caius Baebius Atticus ("in Norico civitas Saevatum et Laiancorum"), so that the Laianci are often placed to their east centred around Aguntum (close to modern day Lienz which shares a certain kind of name similarity). This region was part of the Raetian Fritzens-Sanzeno culture until the late 1st century BC, making the Saevates and the Laianci possibly Raetian tribes in Noricum.
There are several other Raetian tribes which can be localised through archeological findings (Fritzens-Sanzeno culture) or texts:
I'm also not quite sure why the Norici are depicted as living in the north-west of Noricum, as the sanctuary of their goddess would make a placement in Carinthia more likely.
Although this isn't directly connected to Vindelicia; I'd like to mention that the history of the Oppidum Heidengraben seems to match the history of the Tigurini, as the Heidengraben was abandoned around 100 BC, which is around the time the Tigurini marched southwards with the Cimbri (Der Heidengraben. „Ein geheimnisvolles Befestigungswerk aus uralter Zeit“, Gerd Stegmeier, 2013). So that the Tigurini and Tulingi could swap, at least if you don't have a more reliable reason than this attribution .
Vindelician tribes and their presumed location in the 1st century BC (Bedaium Seebruck, 2011)
.png "Screenshot_2018-12-21 lang080414 ppt - lang080414a pdf(1).png")
Fritzens-Sanzeno group and surrounding archeological cultures around 400 BC (Die Räter, Paul Gleirscher 1991)
Division of the Fritzens-Sanzeno culture into a northern, more Celtic influenced group and a southern, more Roman influenced group. The territory of the Fritzens-Sanzeno group stayed constant until the end of the 2nd century BC, when the south got more and more Romanised. (Die Räter, Paul Gleirscher 1991)
.png "Screenshot_2018-12-21 lang080414 ppt - lang080414a pdf(2).png")
Alphabets of the Val-Camonica(squares, left), the Magrè (triangles pointing down, centre) and the Sanzeno (triangles pointing up, right) groups (Das Rungger Egg, Paul Gleischer, 2002)
A possible placement of the Raetian tribes; the Val-Camonica tribes are hard to place, as ancient authors contradict each other. (Archäologie der Räter, Amei Lang, 2008)
.png "Screenshot_2018-12-21 Zur vorrömischen Bevölkerung nach den Schriftquellen(1).png")
The different tribes and their mentions by ancient authors together with found inscriptions (Zur vorrömischen Bevölkerung nach den Schriftquellen, Karlheinz Dietz, 2004)
"Germania"
Before going into detail, I'll take a moment and talk about the classification into Celts and Germans. Caesar based his distinction on geography, the Celts in the west of the Rhine, the Germans in the east. Other ancient authors based their on Caesar's and also the self description of some of the tribes. Modern archeology bases its distinction on the La Tène culture group ("Celtic") on the one side and Jastorf as well as Harpstedt-Nienburger ("Germanic") on the other side. Then there's also the contact zone between those two, in which the two groups influenced each other and maybe even mixed.
In the following, I'll use Celtic and Germanic, but will go into detail why the sharp distinction is a bit problematic with the example of the Ubii.
Map of Oppida (Celtic settlements, ~200 BC - late 1st century BC).
Spread and two possible classifications of the Jastorf culture (Zur Regionalisierung der Jastorf-Kultur: Theoretische und methodische Grundlagen, Frank Nikulka, 2014)
Currently, the culture and religious distribution don't match the Celtic and Germanic cultures of the time period. I suggest changing that to match it more and probably have an overlap with minority cultures and religions in the contact zone.
At the moment, the map has a huge part of Germany depicted as not settled by a tribe, with only the Baltic Sea coast being inhabited by a few Germanic tribes. It's, however, not comprehensible why some tribes were chosen to be represented, while others that came into contact with the Romans far earlier on weren't.
During the Jastorf period (500 BC - ~ mid of 1st century BC) and the Harpstedt-Nienburger period (similar time period), most of their territory was continously settled by Germanic tribes. It's hard to answer which or what tribe settled where in 300 BC and what group migrated where in which year, but currently most of the non-Roman northern hemisphere is based on the situation when the Romans came into contact with those regions. Thus, I don't see why this couldn't be extended for other parts of Germany, where we at least know what tribe settled there later on, too. (I know that the Teutons, Cimbri and Bastanae were the first to come into contact, but all the others reached the Roman territory far later on than e.g. the pagi of the Suebi; especially the Saxones (first mentioned in 285 AD) which were most likely a late fusion of several tribes).
On the Ubii
The Ubii are first mentioned by Caesar in his Commentarii de Bello Gallico, and described as Germans because their settlement was east of the Rhine (east of the Treveri, though shouldn't the Aresaces, located roughly in Rhenish Hesse, be a tributary of the Treveri?). The archeologic findings in this region (material culture like Oppida, coins, etc pp), however, emphasise that this regions was continously settled by La Tène people until around 30-20 BC. Their centre was the Oppidum Dünsberg.
Based on the time evolution of the coins' provenances, those La Tène people are believed to be the Ubii. The coins were minted since around 100 BC around the Dünsberg, when around 30-20 BC the centre moves to the west of the Rhine (area around Cologne). This migration corresponds to the history of the Ubii which were resettled by Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa to the area around Cologne (Colonia Agrippinensium). The Ubii were Romanised very fast.
The Ubii's material culture would therefore be Celtic, yet Caesar describes them as Germanic, other authors state that the Ubii were later on proud on their Germanic heritage (maybe only a claim; the Belgae and Treveri were also proud of their Germanic heritage, but clearly behaved like Celts), and their name is presumed to be of Germanic origin (meaning: above, superior). But Caesar also mentions that the Ubii lived in Oppida (or at least what he believe to be Oppida; Caes. Gall. 6, 10, Vbiis imperat ut pecora deducant suaque omnia ex agris in oppida conferant, sperans barbaros atque imperitos homines inopia cibariorum adductos ad iniquam pugnandi condicionem posse deduci. One of their coin motives could be interpreted as Cerunnos, a Celtic god, but that's highly speculative.
Their situation thus was far more complex. It might be better to describe them as a mixture of Celts (settlements and produced goods) and Germans (language); alternatively: "Celtised Germans" or "Germanised Celts". This situation is comparable to the one of the Treveria and the Belgae, who also claimed Germanic descent; the so called North West Block hypothesis claims they were neither German nor Celtic, but is nowadays often rejected
(c. Der Dünsberg und die jüngsten keltischen Münzen in Hessen, Jens Schulze-Forster, 2005; Die latènezeitlichen Funde vom Dünsberg. Berichte der Kommission für archäologische Landesforschung in Hessen 13, Jens Schulze-Forster, 2015).
Although we can't know whether or not the people settling in that region called themselves Ubii earlier on; it is the only name we have like in most cases for Gaul, Britannia and so on. I should stress that this ascription is based on the coin findings and Caesar's location, i.e. it's again a case of where we most likely will never know the truth.
An interesting example in the same region are the Nemetes (Celtic for people of the forest) and the Vangiones (Germanic for people of the field); they are thus an antithetic pair. This might indicate a name change or a coexistence of Germanic and Celtic languages for those two (Lemovii, Helvecones, Baiavi, Barívoi, Chamavi, Cherusci Stammesnamen zwischen Germanen und Kelten, Norbert Wagner, 2016).
Provenance of coins from the early 1st century BC (Der Dünsberg und die jüngsten keltischen Münzen in Hessen, Jens Schulze-Forster, 2005)
Provenance of coins from the middle (black) to the early (blank) 1st century BC (Der Dünsberg und die jüngsten keltischen Münzen in Hessen, Jens Schulze-Forster, 2005)
Celtic settlements (Höhensiedlung) around 300 BC (Die Burgen der Mittelgebirgszone. Eisenzeitliche Fluchtburgen, befestigte Siedlungen, Zentralorte oder Kultplätze?, Jens Schulze-Forster, 2007)
Naumburger culture and the Teurii
The Naumburger culture is the successor of the Thuringian culture, whereby the region of the Naumburger culture is far smaller, because the Germanic Jastorf culture expanded into this territory. The Naumburger culture is dated to 300 BC to 80 BC and located in the Thuringian Basin and up to the Saale (river). It's considered to be its own culture with a La Tène character influenced by the nearby Germanic Jastorf culture.
Not much is known about the tribe that inhabited this region apart from a mention of Ptolemaios, when he wrote that the region was called Teuriochaemae (home of the Teurii, compare Boihaemium) before the 2nd century AD. Teurii is a Celtic name and relates to a mountain chain, and also appears in the name of the Celtic Taurisci/Teurisci. The Thuringian tribe can't be the source of this name, as it formed and was mentioned for the first time far later on (~400 AD) (Glutgeboren. Mittelbronzezeit bis Eisenzeit, Harald Meller, 2015).
I should stress that it's up to debate whether or not one follows the argument and relates the archeologic culture calle Naumburger with this mention by Ptolemaios. I personally think that the lack of mention later on might be related to it being a small region which could get overwhelmed by Germanic tribes easily, i.e. most of its population could die in such an invasion.
Vangiones, Nemetes and Triboci
In his Bello Gallico, Caesar mentions that the Vangiones, Nemetes and Triboci were "Germans" that had invaded and settled in Gaul a few years before the Bello Gallico. The land they settled was formely inhabited by the Mediomatrici, who according to Caesar bordered the Sequani and together inhabited the Upper Rhine region. Strabon also mentions this and states that the Triboci settled in the region between the Sequani and Mediomatrici. All three tribes allied with Ariovist and fought against Caesar in 58 BC. The region they inhabited shortly before and after the Gallic war, however, again shows only Celtic findings and a continous settlement for the time period in question. Their situation might have been similar to that of the Ubii (Worms und die Vangiones. Fakten und Fiktionen, Ralph Häussler, 2007).
So now the question arises from where these three tribes came originally? According to Caesar they came from east of the Rhine a few years before the Bello Gallico, but he doesn't specify from where. As much of south-western Germany was inhabited by the Helvetii, who also bordered the Boii and allied with them, according to Caesar, and they seem to have an archeologic Celtic culture, the most likely original location could be north of the Helvetii in Franconia, next to the Thuringian forest and possibly even the area around Darmstadt. Another hint could be the names of the Nemetes (Celtic for people of the forest) and Vangiones(Germanic for people of the field; Lemovii, Helvecones, Baiavi, Barívoi, Chamavi, Cherusci Stammesnamen zwischen Germanen und Kelten, Norbert Wagner, 2016), which at least at one point in time lived next to each other in the corresponding region. The Vangiones might have been more exposed to Germanic culture.
The Volcae, who according to Caesar came from the Hercynian forest and were later fought by the Romans in southern France, are sometimes mentioned as another possible tribe for Franconia and the Thuringian forest (or even the true name of the Celts in Boihaemium), but they did never appear at the Roman border as refugees or aggressors. If they had been truly as big as described, they should've been able to at least flee partially, shouldn't they?
I'd like to stress that this was all quite speculative and is up to interpretation.
Possible region of the Helvetii before Caesar's arrival; their region might have extended towards the Boii, as they are described as allies by Caesar and as neighbours by some ancient authors (Die Helvetier als Nachbarn der Boier – Kommunikation und Vernetzung gallischer und ostkeltischer Räume, Holger Wendling, 2015).
Germania Magna
I want to preface this with my sentiment that I wouldn't have included any playable Germanic tribes in northern Germany and Scandinavia. I guess that's out of question, because Paradox is a Swedish company and wants to represent its home region. If so, the same standards should be applied to ALL Germanic tribes for self consistency. The Jastorf and the Harpstedt-Nienburger culture were both proto-Germanic (some would say that the latter would've started as a Nordwestblock and slowly got Germanised, but that's a highly disputed theory by Hans Kuhn, 1959), i.e. the tribes that would appear later on during Caesar's,Drusus's and others' military campaigns emerged from these. As most of the tribes' names are based around the mentions of Ceasar, Tacitus, Strabon, Ptolemaios, Plinius, Velleius and others, I'll use those as well for the Germanic tribes.
For the Vandals, Lugians, ... see @vanin 's thread and the accompanying discussion.
I'd also like to mention that the Aduataci were the remnants of the Teutons and Cimbri according to Caesar, so they shouldn't be on the map.
Jastorf and the Suebi:
As the Jastorf culture roughly corresponds to the region where the Suebi emerged, they are often associated with each other, but there's no final proof for that. Those Suebian names are the only ones we have, and, as I've already mentioned several times, the same standard has been applied to other regions.
Spread and two possible classifications of the Jastorf culture (Zur Regionalisierung der Jastorf-Kultur: Theoretische und methodische Grundlagen, Frank Nikulka, 2014)
Ingvaeones-Istvaeones and the Harpstedt-Nienburger/Contact Zone groups:
This is again a prescription like with the Jastorft culture and the Suebi.
The Saxons shouldn't be a tag in 304 BC, as they are only mentioned later on (~285 AD), e.g. Tacitus, who mentions dozens over dozens of tribes, not mentioning such a large tribe doesn't really make sense. Ptolemaios's mention of the Saxones might be because of a text corruption, as most handwritings mention the "Axones" and not the Saxones, so that Ptolemaios maybe meant the Aviones which are mentioned by Tacitus.
Regardless, the Saxons would be a good formable for those coastal tribes.
I hope it might be useful for improving this game, @Trin Tragula @Arheo
The Boian Confederation in "Boihaemium"
(I'm going to use the following definitions: Boihaemium: land of the Boii, Bohemia: land of the state starting from the early modern period [Bohemia proper and Moravia as its constituencies])
The northern Boii are a quite elusive Celtic tribe, and are located in a region called Boihaemium by late ancient authors. This name is based on Germanic tribes naming this region after the Boii, but, at this point in time, the Boii had already deserted their former lands. This has raised concerns by some authors (Das Wandern ist der Boier Lust? Quellenkritische Überlegungen zur Ethnizität latènezeitlicher Gruppen im mittleren Donauraum, Peter Trebsche, 2015; Střední evropa na prahu historie – keltové v písemných pramenech, Jan Kysela, 2011) that the Boii might have never settled in Bohemia and only around Bratislava in the so called Boian Desert, whose localisation is possible through written sources. Commonly accepted facts about the Boii are
- Boii defeating the Cimbri in 113 BC
- Boii unsuccessfully sieging Noreia before 58 BC
- 32,000 (or less) Boii being defeated by Caesar in 58 BC and their new home shared with the Aedui
- Boii being defeated by the Dacians in between 50 and 40 BC, leading to the Boiian Desert
- Boiian Desert located around Savaria and Scarbantia
Nevertheless, the Celtic populace in Bohemia shared a material culture with the area around Bratislava. This has led to coining the name, "Boian coinage region", as they can be attributed to Boihaemium. It's also very likely that this region couldn't be ruled by one ruler, so that it's assumed to be a confederation with similar features, which colonised Bohemia proper, Moravia and southern Silesia in the 4th century BC. This region started trading with the Norici and Taurisci before the Oppida period, but most of the findings are dated into this period (Boii - Taurisci, MPK 85, 2015).
Oppida in Bohemia (Zur Oppidaforschung in Böhmen und Mähren, Vladimír Salač, 2009)
Extent of the Boii culture in the late 2nd century and 1st century BC; dots indicate where Knotenringe have been found (Boii - Taurisci, MPK 85, 2015)
The area of this Boian confederation encompassed the region around Bratislava (Boian Desert) and southern Silesia, which were both lightly colonised in the late 4th century BC and, starting from around 270 BC, a bigger influx happened (Archäologische Untersuchungen zu den Migrationsbewegungen der Keltenin ausgewählten Regionen zwischen dem Donaugebiet und Kleinasienwährend der Früh- und Mittellatènezeit, Lucia Raphaela Moiné, 2009). There were also settlers in modern-day Straubing (excavations there show that the region was abandoned in the beginning of the 4th century BC, but settled by immigrants from Bohemia in the later 4th century; those immigrants lived there, at least partially, for 250 years; Kelten und Germanen in Straubing, Claudia Tappert, 2004). The influence of the Boii extended over some parts of Pannonia over the years.
Whether or not the Boii were related to the Italian Boii is highly disputed. Because the name means warrior, it might have been a very popular one, so that the name similarity might be related to a coincidence.
Boihaemium was settled even before the expulsion of the Italian Boii. This has lead to some authors assuming that the Boii were united earlier on, but split into a Bohemian and an Italian part in between the 600 and 400 BC.
To sum it up:
In a game like Imperator, it's not possible to represent this ambiguity, so it's necessary to decide. As I've pointed out there was a Celtic population in Boihaemium, so calling and including this tribal confederation Boii would make sense. Possibly, their starting tribal loyalty could be lowered to represent its decentralisation.
Vindelicia and Raetians
At the moment, there are several Vindelician tribes in the game, but there are some other known ones that aren't yet. We know of 8 (or more depending on whether or not some tribes are associated with the Norici or the Raeti) from the Tropaeum Alpium (VINDELICORVM GENTES. QVATTVOR. COSVANETES. RVCINATES. LICATES. CATENATES.), whereby the VINDELICORVM GENTES. QVATTVOR. aren't specified here. From various other ancient sources we know about two out of those four that they, the Briganti and Estiones, settled around and north-east of Lake Constance (the settlements there are confirmed by excavations, c. Bevor die Römer kamen. Späte Kelten am Bodensee, Urs Leuzinger, 2009). The Leuni are mentioned to the west of the Cosuanetes by Ptolemaios in his Geographia, II.12,4 (3). (Runicates: most northern part of Vindelica, below: Leuni/Deuni and Consunates, below: Benlanes/Genaunes, below: Breuni). Furthermore, Strabo wriote about the Licates that the Norici live to their north, while they are often presumed to be located at the river Lech based on their name. This leaves one of the four tribes unnamed. That Norican tribe to the Licati's north might have been the Alaunes, as a sancutary consecrated for the gods Bedaios and Alounae has been found in the vicinity of Bedaium (today's Seebruck).
It's also known that southern Bavaria was continously inhabited from way before 300 BC up until the Romans came in 15 BC, and that the Upper Palatinate and Franconia (exception: region norht of Würzburg) were mostly abandoned and only sparsely populated in the 4th century BC; only later on, Oppida were founded there (Bayerns Kelten – die armen Vettern im Osten?, Markus Schußmann, 2012).
Also the Sevaces might be just an error by Ptolemaios, as their name is quite similar to the Saevates. According to the museum of St. Lorenzen the Saevates lived around St. Lorenzen (Southern Tyrol) throughout the early iron age and gave Sebantum (St Lorenzen) its name. They also appear paired together with the Laianci in an inscription to honour Caius Baebius Atticus ("in Norico civitas Saevatum et Laiancorum"), so that the Laianci are often placed to their east centred around Aguntum (close to modern day Lienz which shares a certain kind of name similarity). This region was part of the Raetian Fritzens-Sanzeno culture until the late 1st century BC, making the Saevates and the Laianci possibly Raetian tribes in Noricum.
There are several other Raetian tribes which can be localised through archeological findings (Fritzens-Sanzeno culture) or texts:
- The Tridentini, Feltrini and Beruenses lived in the south of Raetia around Trento and Feltre (Plinius XXIII, 130). Only the Tridentini would be represented, as the other two are located in a wasteland.
- The Anaunes can be located around Bozen (Zur vorrömischen Bevölkerung nach den Schriftquellen, Karlheinz Dietz, 2004), as the Tabula Clesiana depicts how the Anaunes (together with two other tribes) were granted citizenship rights by emperor Claudius in 46 AD.
- The Venostes are mentioned on the Tropaeum Alpium as well as on an inscription from the 8th century AD. Accordingly, the region they inhabited, the Vinschgau, is named after them (Karlheinz Dietz, 2004; Von Rätien und Noricum zu Tirol. Geschichtsbilder und Meistererzählungen für das erste Jahrtausend unserer Zeit, Roland Steinacher, 2014).
- The Isarci are mentioned on the Tropaeum Alpium right after the Venostes; as their name seems to be related to the Eisack/Isarco, they are often placed to the east of the Venostes (Roland Steinacher, 2014)
- Genaunes and Breuni are mentioned on the Tropaeum Alpium, mentioned by Horatius (Carm. 4,14) fighting together in the Alps and mentioned by Ptolemaios as the southern inhabitans of Vindelicia (Genaunes above Breuni). The Breuni's name might be related to the Brenner located near or in their territory (Roland Steinacher, 2014)
- The Focunates are mentioned on the Tropaeum Alpium as well as on an inscription (Karlheinz Dietz, 2004), but no further localisation is possible. Their location might have been the western part of the Fritzen-Sanzeno's Nordgruppe, as no other tribe is mentioned for that region.
I'm also not quite sure why the Norici are depicted as living in the north-west of Noricum, as the sanctuary of their goddess would make a placement in Carinthia more likely.
Although this isn't directly connected to Vindelicia; I'd like to mention that the history of the Oppidum Heidengraben seems to match the history of the Tigurini, as the Heidengraben was abandoned around 100 BC, which is around the time the Tigurini marched southwards with the Cimbri (Der Heidengraben. „Ein geheimnisvolles Befestigungswerk aus uralter Zeit“, Gerd Stegmeier, 2013). So that the Tigurini and Tulingi could swap, at least if you don't have a more reliable reason than this attribution .
Vindelician tribes and their presumed location in the 1st century BC (Bedaium Seebruck, 2011)
Fritzens-Sanzeno group and surrounding archeological cultures around 400 BC (Die Räter, Paul Gleirscher 1991)
Division of the Fritzens-Sanzeno culture into a northern, more Celtic influenced group and a southern, more Roman influenced group. The territory of the Fritzens-Sanzeno group stayed constant until the end of the 2nd century BC, when the south got more and more Romanised. (Die Räter, Paul Gleirscher 1991)
Alphabets of the Val-Camonica(squares, left), the Magrè (triangles pointing down, centre) and the Sanzeno (triangles pointing up, right) groups (Das Rungger Egg, Paul Gleischer, 2002)
A possible placement of the Raetian tribes; the Val-Camonica tribes are hard to place, as ancient authors contradict each other. (Archäologie der Räter, Amei Lang, 2008)
"Germania"
Before going into detail, I'll take a moment and talk about the classification into Celts and Germans. Caesar based his distinction on geography, the Celts in the west of the Rhine, the Germans in the east. Other ancient authors based their on Caesar's and also the self description of some of the tribes. Modern archeology bases its distinction on the La Tène culture group ("Celtic") on the one side and Jastorf as well as Harpstedt-Nienburger ("Germanic") on the other side. Then there's also the contact zone between those two, in which the two groups influenced each other and maybe even mixed.
In the following, I'll use Celtic and Germanic, but will go into detail why the sharp distinction is a bit problematic with the example of the Ubii.
Map of Oppida (Celtic settlements, ~200 BC - late 1st century BC).
Currently, the culture and religious distribution don't match the Celtic and Germanic cultures of the time period. I suggest changing that to match it more and probably have an overlap with minority cultures and religions in the contact zone.
At the moment, the map has a huge part of Germany depicted as not settled by a tribe, with only the Baltic Sea coast being inhabited by a few Germanic tribes. It's, however, not comprehensible why some tribes were chosen to be represented, while others that came into contact with the Romans far earlier on weren't.
During the Jastorf period (500 BC - ~ mid of 1st century BC) and the Harpstedt-Nienburger period (similar time period), most of their territory was continously settled by Germanic tribes. It's hard to answer which or what tribe settled where in 300 BC and what group migrated where in which year, but currently most of the non-Roman northern hemisphere is based on the situation when the Romans came into contact with those regions. Thus, I don't see why this couldn't be extended for other parts of Germany, where we at least know what tribe settled there later on, too. (I know that the Teutons, Cimbri and Bastanae were the first to come into contact, but all the others reached the Roman territory far later on than e.g. the pagi of the Suebi; especially the Saxones (first mentioned in 285 AD) which were most likely a late fusion of several tribes).
On the Ubii
The Ubii are first mentioned by Caesar in his Commentarii de Bello Gallico, and described as Germans because their settlement was east of the Rhine (east of the Treveri, though shouldn't the Aresaces, located roughly in Rhenish Hesse, be a tributary of the Treveri?). The archeologic findings in this region (material culture like Oppida, coins, etc pp), however, emphasise that this regions was continously settled by La Tène people until around 30-20 BC. Their centre was the Oppidum Dünsberg.
Based on the time evolution of the coins' provenances, those La Tène people are believed to be the Ubii. The coins were minted since around 100 BC around the Dünsberg, when around 30-20 BC the centre moves to the west of the Rhine (area around Cologne). This migration corresponds to the history of the Ubii which were resettled by Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa to the area around Cologne (Colonia Agrippinensium). The Ubii were Romanised very fast.
The Ubii's material culture would therefore be Celtic, yet Caesar describes them as Germanic, other authors state that the Ubii were later on proud on their Germanic heritage (maybe only a claim; the Belgae and Treveri were also proud of their Germanic heritage, but clearly behaved like Celts), and their name is presumed to be of Germanic origin (meaning: above, superior). But Caesar also mentions that the Ubii lived in Oppida (or at least what he believe to be Oppida; Caes. Gall. 6, 10, Vbiis imperat ut pecora deducant suaque omnia ex agris in oppida conferant, sperans barbaros atque imperitos homines inopia cibariorum adductos ad iniquam pugnandi condicionem posse deduci. One of their coin motives could be interpreted as Cerunnos, a Celtic god, but that's highly speculative.
Their situation thus was far more complex. It might be better to describe them as a mixture of Celts (settlements and produced goods) and Germans (language); alternatively: "Celtised Germans" or "Germanised Celts". This situation is comparable to the one of the Treveria and the Belgae, who also claimed Germanic descent; the so called North West Block hypothesis claims they were neither German nor Celtic, but is nowadays often rejected
(c. Der Dünsberg und die jüngsten keltischen Münzen in Hessen, Jens Schulze-Forster, 2005; Die latènezeitlichen Funde vom Dünsberg. Berichte der Kommission für archäologische Landesforschung in Hessen 13, Jens Schulze-Forster, 2015).
Although we can't know whether or not the people settling in that region called themselves Ubii earlier on; it is the only name we have like in most cases for Gaul, Britannia and so on. I should stress that this ascription is based on the coin findings and Caesar's location, i.e. it's again a case of where we most likely will never know the truth.
An interesting example in the same region are the Nemetes (Celtic for people of the forest) and the Vangiones (Germanic for people of the field); they are thus an antithetic pair. This might indicate a name change or a coexistence of Germanic and Celtic languages for those two (Lemovii, Helvecones, Baiavi, Barívoi, Chamavi, Cherusci Stammesnamen zwischen Germanen und Kelten, Norbert Wagner, 2016).
Provenance of coins from the early 1st century BC (Der Dünsberg und die jüngsten keltischen Münzen in Hessen, Jens Schulze-Forster, 2005)
Provenance of coins from the middle (black) to the early (blank) 1st century BC (Der Dünsberg und die jüngsten keltischen Münzen in Hessen, Jens Schulze-Forster, 2005)
Celtic settlements (Höhensiedlung) around 300 BC (Die Burgen der Mittelgebirgszone. Eisenzeitliche Fluchtburgen, befestigte Siedlungen, Zentralorte oder Kultplätze?, Jens Schulze-Forster, 2007)
Naumburger culture and the Teurii
The Naumburger culture is the successor of the Thuringian culture, whereby the region of the Naumburger culture is far smaller, because the Germanic Jastorf culture expanded into this territory. The Naumburger culture is dated to 300 BC to 80 BC and located in the Thuringian Basin and up to the Saale (river). It's considered to be its own culture with a La Tène character influenced by the nearby Germanic Jastorf culture.
Not much is known about the tribe that inhabited this region apart from a mention of Ptolemaios, when he wrote that the region was called Teuriochaemae (home of the Teurii, compare Boihaemium) before the 2nd century AD. Teurii is a Celtic name and relates to a mountain chain, and also appears in the name of the Celtic Taurisci/Teurisci. The Thuringian tribe can't be the source of this name, as it formed and was mentioned for the first time far later on (~400 AD) (Glutgeboren. Mittelbronzezeit bis Eisenzeit, Harald Meller, 2015).
I should stress that it's up to debate whether or not one follows the argument and relates the archeologic culture calle Naumburger with this mention by Ptolemaios. I personally think that the lack of mention later on might be related to it being a small region which could get overwhelmed by Germanic tribes easily, i.e. most of its population could die in such an invasion.
Vangiones, Nemetes and Triboci
In his Bello Gallico, Caesar mentions that the Vangiones, Nemetes and Triboci were "Germans" that had invaded and settled in Gaul a few years before the Bello Gallico. The land they settled was formely inhabited by the Mediomatrici, who according to Caesar bordered the Sequani and together inhabited the Upper Rhine region. Strabon also mentions this and states that the Triboci settled in the region between the Sequani and Mediomatrici. All three tribes allied with Ariovist and fought against Caesar in 58 BC. The region they inhabited shortly before and after the Gallic war, however, again shows only Celtic findings and a continous settlement for the time period in question. Their situation might have been similar to that of the Ubii (Worms und die Vangiones. Fakten und Fiktionen, Ralph Häussler, 2007).
So now the question arises from where these three tribes came originally? According to Caesar they came from east of the Rhine a few years before the Bello Gallico, but he doesn't specify from where. As much of south-western Germany was inhabited by the Helvetii, who also bordered the Boii and allied with them, according to Caesar, and they seem to have an archeologic Celtic culture, the most likely original location could be north of the Helvetii in Franconia, next to the Thuringian forest and possibly even the area around Darmstadt. Another hint could be the names of the Nemetes (Celtic for people of the forest) and Vangiones(Germanic for people of the field; Lemovii, Helvecones, Baiavi, Barívoi, Chamavi, Cherusci Stammesnamen zwischen Germanen und Kelten, Norbert Wagner, 2016), which at least at one point in time lived next to each other in the corresponding region. The Vangiones might have been more exposed to Germanic culture.
The Volcae, who according to Caesar came from the Hercynian forest and were later fought by the Romans in southern France, are sometimes mentioned as another possible tribe for Franconia and the Thuringian forest (or even the true name of the Celts in Boihaemium), but they did never appear at the Roman border as refugees or aggressors. If they had been truly as big as described, they should've been able to at least flee partially, shouldn't they?
I'd like to stress that this was all quite speculative and is up to interpretation.
Possible region of the Helvetii before Caesar's arrival; their region might have extended towards the Boii, as they are described as allies by Caesar and as neighbours by some ancient authors (Die Helvetier als Nachbarn der Boier – Kommunikation und Vernetzung gallischer und ostkeltischer Räume, Holger Wendling, 2015).
Germania Magna
I want to preface this with my sentiment that I wouldn't have included any playable Germanic tribes in northern Germany and Scandinavia. I guess that's out of question, because Paradox is a Swedish company and wants to represent its home region. If so, the same standards should be applied to ALL Germanic tribes for self consistency. The Jastorf and the Harpstedt-Nienburger culture were both proto-Germanic (some would say that the latter would've started as a Nordwestblock and slowly got Germanised, but that's a highly disputed theory by Hans Kuhn, 1959), i.e. the tribes that would appear later on during Caesar's,Drusus's and others' military campaigns emerged from these. As most of the tribes' names are based around the mentions of Ceasar, Tacitus, Strabon, Ptolemaios, Plinius, Velleius and others, I'll use those as well for the Germanic tribes.
For the Vandals, Lugians, ... see @vanin 's thread and the accompanying discussion.
I'd also like to mention that the Aduataci were the remnants of the Teutons and Cimbri according to Caesar, so they shouldn't be on the map.
Jastorf and the Suebi:
As the Jastorf culture roughly corresponds to the region where the Suebi emerged, they are often associated with each other, but there's no final proof for that. Those Suebian names are the only ones we have, and, as I've already mentioned several times, the same standard has been applied to other regions.
- Cherusci and Fosi: According to Tacitus, the latter were subjects of the former. Tacitus mentions that they are neighbours of the Chatti, Chauci and Angrivarii. Ptolemaios specifies that their territory extended to the Harz, and Ceasar states that they are seperated through the Bacenis forest, which could correspond to the lack of more than a handful of scattered findings in the area I marked, from the Suebi. They are also mentioned by Plinius.
- Langobardi: According to Velleius they, moved from south of the Elbe to north during the military campaigns of the Romans. Tacitus wrote that they are a small but fierce tribe north of the Semnones and surrounded by much bigger tribes; the Aviones, Varini and Angli were close to them, too.
- Varini: They should own all of the coastal territory west of the Oder (see thread by @vanin why the Vandals shouldn't have any territory) possibly together with the Suarines and the Nuithones.
- Semones: They are described as the biggest tribe of the Suebi with a vast territory and as the core of the Suebi by Tacitus; they lived south of the Langobardi.
- Hermunduri: They wandered southwards from where they traded with the Romans and lived close to the Quadi, Marcomanni and Naristi (Tacitus).
- Marcomanni, Quadi and Naristi: The former two moved to Boihaemium later on, whereas the latter was a small tribe, which wandered to Franconia from the north. The Marcomanni's name means men of the march, so that a position close to Celts or other foreigners is probable. Archeological findings emphasise that tribes from northern Thuringia invaded Boihaemium in the second half of the 1st century BC. This contrasts with the often made claim that the Marcomanni invaded Boihaemium from the Main during Drusus's campaign around the turn of the eras, as only a few Germanic objects from that period have been found (Vladimír Salač, Zwei Beispiele des Beharrungsvermögens in denEisenzeitinterpretationen: Die Oppida und die Markomannen, 2013). I placed them like in the above map, as I assumed that the Marcomanni were the ones conquering Boihaemium, so that they are placed in the core territory of the Großromstedter culture.
Spread and two possible classifications of the Jastorf culture (Zur Regionalisierung der Jastorf-Kultur: Theoretische und methodische Grundlagen, Frank Nikulka, 2014)
Ingvaeones-Istvaeones and the Harpstedt-Nienburger/Contact Zone groups:
This is again a prescription like with the Jastorft culture and the Suebi.
The Saxons shouldn't be a tag in 304 BC, as they are only mentioned later on (~285 AD), e.g. Tacitus, who mentions dozens over dozens of tribes, not mentioning such a large tribe doesn't really make sense. Ptolemaios's mention of the Saxones might be because of a text corruption, as most handwritings mention the "Axones" and not the Saxones, so that Ptolemaios maybe meant the Aviones which are mentioned by Tacitus.
Regardless, the Saxons would be a good formable for those coastal tribes.
- Aviones: According to Tacitus they lived nearby the Angles and the Langobardi. If one assumes that Ptolemaios's text was corrupted, then he mentions them north of the lower Elbe and the Chauci, placing them near the location where Tacitus roughly described them.
- Chauci: They lived at the North Sea coast and were a quite large tribe according to Plinius and Tacitus, who positions them west of the Frisii and north of the Cherusci and who describes their land extending to the Elbe.
- Chatti and Batavi: The latter was probably vassals of the Chatti. Tacitus describes them as northern neighbours of the Truncteri and Usipetes as well as eastern and southern neighbours of the Cherusci and Chauci.
- Frisii: They were the eastern neighbours of the Chauci, lived north of the Rhine and around several lakes and were divided into bigger and smaller Frisii (Tacitus).
- Bructeri: They were divided into a smaller and bigger tribe, too. They were located next to the Truncteri before their downfall (Tacitus).
- Chamavi, Angrivarii and Ampsivarii: Tacitus recorded that the first two tribes defeated the Bructeri, moved to the latter's land and lived nearby the Frisii. The Ampsivarii's name derives from the river Ems, and Tacitus wrote that they were expelled by the Chauci (Annals, XIII 55).
- Sugambri, Tencteri and Usipetes: Were located by Tacitus in central Westfalia. The Tencteri and Usipetes were expelled by the Suebi during the Bello Gallico and were accepted by the Sugambri after they had tried invading Gaul. This might make a longer-lasting relationship possible.
Attachments
Last edited:
