What are the Cimbri?

[Frostwulf]

Quote Originally Posted by Frostwulf
What I was trying to say that the tribes at the time of Tacitus had adopted a German culture and therefore would have been appropriate to call them Germani
Again, we have this:

When I said the above quote, it was in relation to the North Sea group(Ingaevones) having a "Germanic" culture by the time of the meeting with the Romans. This is talking of the Frisians, Saxons and others in this group, not of the Osi, Boii or others that are considered "Celtic".

IIRC, the Aravisci were Celts with a Celtic culture. And Tacitus says that the Osians are Germani, but have the same customs and laws as the Aravisci. Therefore, if what I recall is correct, then the Osians had a Celtic culture, as opposed to (what you call) a "German culture."

Tacitus also says the Osi were non-Germanic in 43.1 and he was basing this on language. Here is what I wrote in my post above:

When speaking of "[a Germanic tribe]"28.3, according to Bruhn and Lund they say that this is equivalent to Germaniae natio, 'a tribe of Germania' as opposed to Germanorum natio 'a tribe of the Germani'(this is considered by some to be forced) . Others say that it was "a later marginal note mistakenly incorporated into the text". Apparently the later seems to be the consensus.

Again Bruhn and Lund think the term tribe of the Germani was wrong, they say it was a tribe of Germania. But most seem to say that Germanorum natio should not have been in the text, that it being there was a mistake. Therefore when he says Germanic tribe, that is in error.

Note Old Prussian (a Baltic, not Germanic language) glesis, "amber" - which, along with PGmc *glasō both potentially fit with Tacitus' word. It's undeniable that they're cognates - but the question is, which one loaned the word to the other at this stage - early Baltic tongues or early Germanic tongues? (To make myself clear - I am not suggesting that Old Prussian was spoken at this time)

According to Tacitus, the Aestii were the primary harvesters of glaesum/amber - and the Aestii inhabited the area known as East Prussia (now part of Lithuania) - the primary area where Old Prussian was spoken (and was the dominant language until its Germanization). To me, it seems more reasonable to assume that the Aestii spoke a Baltic language, as opposed to a Germanic one, than the opposite.

I'm under the impression that Old Prussian is gentars and Lithanian is gintaras. As for the rest of what your saying, it could very well be correct.

This is the end of Suebia. As for the nations of the Peucini, Veneti, and Fenni, I am unsure whether I should assign them to the Germani or the Sarmatians. 46.1

Why should he be unsure? If the term Germani was a geographical term as you say, both the Veneti and Fenni should be classified as "Germani". Yet Tacitus is unsure. He then goes on to talk of why they should be properly classified as Germani, because of customs, shields etc., nothing of of geography.
You have the Boii, Contini, Helvetii,Aravisci,Volcae Tectosages and others living within the geographical area you describe, yet they are called "Celts" by the Romans. By your definition they should be called Germani. You also have others the Romans call Germani(Vangiones, Eburones, Condrusi, etc.) living outside the geographical boundaries you describe, should they not be called "Celts" or something else by the Romans?