Quote Originally Posted by Jolt View Post




You're arguing in circles. You are giving us joint Celtiberian facts as if they were always a single people with a single leadership and single interests. They weren't. We discussed this. Now if you give out the facts of each Celtiberian tribe (Belli facts against Lusitani facts) and pit them against the Lusitanians, then you may be getting somewhere.


I think I am not the only going in circles, and in each post I try to be constructive with new facts. You are the only one who is going in circles and speaking in general most of the time.



Quote Originally Posted by Jolt View Post
Yet the truth still is that tribes banded into aglomerates and if the tribes were culturally united and politically close, for a foreign person from which we inherit most of the written history about they were talked as the same entity, when they weren't, and one particular good example of that is when several Galician tribes declared themselves Lusitanians and were mentioned being Lusitanians when they weren't. That's the difference. The Celtiberians happened to be a confederation a handful of times, while the Lusitanians were an aglomerate of different small tribes which were culturally similar for all we know. A confederation implies that its members are bound by common interest but do not always have so. At least that is the idea I sport.
Again, this happens in all the tribes across Iberia, all the tribes in the map are aglomeration of other groups, I could bring you infinite examples, for example the Zoelae -a really big group- being part of the Astures. So the most important in the Celtiberian issue is that they were several tribes with their own aglomerate each one that in some moments they were united under a kind of confederation, were considered a pack by Classical sources, or the arqueology identify them as a arqueologycal differencied group. ...So be sure it is not my creation



Quote Originally Posted by Jolt View Post
Then I'm afraid there is little room for your ideas to be incorporated in any way. In any case, its practically confirmed that they'll be in EB 2.
I am only discussing and trying to give other sources and points of view in a matter that I think it is biased in some way or it isnt accurate enough. If the developers want to fix this in some way, it is their decission, what is the problem with you and your fellow country-man with this?.

If a Arevaci faction is added in EB2 I really would love it, and as me plenty other players, spanish or not.