map of iron age indo-european languages by TheOldNorth

[TheOldNorth]

indo-european mid iron age v.2 (speculative).png

Languages by Color from darkest shade to lightest
Green - Primitive Irish, Proto-Brittonic, Gaulish/Galatian, Hispano-celtic (Celtiberian and Gallaecian + Tartessian? Lusitanian?)
Blue - Gothic, High German (proto-Deustch), Frankish (proto-Dutch), Saxon (proto-English/Frisian/Low German), Proto Norse (stage before Old Norse)
Yellow-Brown - Sicel, Oscan, Umbrian, Old Latin/Faliscan, Venetic (note that the yellow in the bottom of Italy is greek not Venetiic or Latin)
Yellow - Doric Greek, Koine Greek
Purple - Baltic, Slavic, Daco-Thracian, Illyrian
Orange-Brown - Persian, Median, Parthian, Bactrian, Scythian/Saka/Alanic/Sarmatian, Sogdian (note that the brown in western china is Tocharian)
Red - Nuristani, Dardic, Shauraseni Prakrit, Magadhi Prakrit, Maharasthri Prakrit, Sri Lankan Prakrit
others, brown in china = Tocharian, gold in eastern Anatolia = Armenian

[TheOldNorth]

bump, opinions?

[Ouistreham]

Pretty good job, congrats.

One minor objection: the naming "Frankish" showed up much later (circa 1,500 years) in history. But if it's used to define the cluster of Germanic cultures that eventually took shape as the Ripuarian and Salian Frankish federation, it makes sense.

Probably the Ligurian domain was somewhat larger, IMHO it encompassed back then most of NW Italy as well as a fairly big chunk of Provence. And there is some evidence that Ligures and Iberians met where Provence and Languedoc meet, near the Rhône delta. Did the Gaulish culture ever reach the Mediterranean shore? Politically and militarily yes, but linguistically?

Of course here come the classic problems: which Celtiberians were more Celtic or more Iberian? Which Celto-Ligurians where predominantly Celtic or Ligures, and at what time? Were the Etruscans the bulk of Etrurian population, or just a tiny aristocracy superimposed to a populace that could have used some Italic language of which all record has been lost?

All in all, your map delivers a good starting point to grasp the cultural dynamics that developed until the next millenium.

[TheOldNorth]

Pretty good job, congrats.

One minor objection: the naming "Frankish" showed up much later (circa 1,500 years) in history. But if it's used to define the cluster of Germanic cultures that eventually took shape as the Ripuarian and Salian Frankish federation, it makes sense.

Probably the Ligurian domain was somewhat larger, IMHO it encompassed back then most of NW Italy as well as a fairly big chunk of Provence. And there is some evidence that Ligures and Iberians met where Provence and Languedoc meet, near the Rhône delta. Did the Gaulish culture ever reach the Mediterranean shore? Politically and militarily yes, but linguistically?

Of course here come the classic problems: which Celtiberians were more Celtic or more Iberian? Which Celto-Ligurians where predominantly Celtic or Ligures, and at what time? Were the Etruscans the bulk of Etrurian population, or just a tiny aristocracy superimposed to a populace that could have used some Italic language of which all record has been lost?

All in all, your map delivers a good starting point to grasp the cultural dynamics that developed until the next millenium.

You’re correct on my reasoning for calling them Frankish, and those aren’t ligurians, they are Massalian Greeks. To be honest I was planning on adding Ligurian and Lusitanian under “para-Celtic” but I forgot to or was putting it off for a finishing touch. I do think Celtic peoples made it to the Mediterranean in southwestern France, after all the even Massalians referred to the people in their surroundings as Gaulish, despite the fact they were in Ligurian territory, so maybe the Ligurians were Celtic, maybe they weren’t, or maybe some of their tribes where mixed, but either way the Ligurians didn’t stretch that far west.