|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
||It is requested that an image or photograph be included in this article to improve its quality.
The Free Image Search Tool may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites.
The Teutones were not as is stereotypically thought of as the classic nordic/aryan peoples;even though their name has been used to categorise every garmanic tribe . They,along with their allies the cimbri were a tribe of the pre-viking age who shared a common north european celto/germanic culture.Their name,by simple logic suggests they worshipped Teutatis/Toutatis ,the god of the tuath/teuat or"tribe".The many finds in jutland show that the cultures of celtic britain and 'teutonic" denmark were basically the same. (anonymous)
The choice of the spelling invented for Astrerix doesn't fill the reader with confidence. The few instances of the name in literature could all be mentioned, to give us an idea of what the Romans thought this word signified, and a link to at least one discussion of Teutates would inspire confidence. --Wetman 12:33, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
- That's because it is totally untrue that the spelling was invented for Astérix. More than one ancient inscription in Roman Britain or Gaul was dedicated to Toutatis or Mars Toutatis. Outside of Latin literary references, Toutatis is actually the most common spelling. QuartierLatin1968 17:42, 25 August 2006 (UTC) (BTW, Astérix did an unusually good job of historical research here. The phrase 'by Toutatis!' is calqued on the ancient Irish expression 'I swear by the god my tuath swears by', where tuath represents the same Celtic root for 'tribe' that we also find in the god-name Toutatis.)
It seems to me that there is a linguistic similarity between the two above. It might offend Modern mores suggesting that Celtic God and a Germanic one may have the same basis, but they both have common attributes. the "Tis" at the end of the former and the "Ti" are surely cognate? Brendandh 00:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
- Isn't there a common Indo-European root? Here in Germany Zeus is pronounced like "Tseus". The Latin word "deus" and the Indian term "deva" both mean "god", so maybe it doesn't necessarily refer to the old word for "people"? Fulcher (talk) 19:51, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
I can find six inscriptions:
- AE 1994, 01120 Little Walsingham
- AE 2001, 01290 Lincolnshire
- AE 2001, 01298 Benwell / Condercum
- CIL 03, 11721 Seggauberg / Solva
- CIL 06, 31182 Roma
- RIB 00219 Barkway
What are the other four?
The online 'roman britain' version of RIB 01017 does not mention IOM. It says 'RIOCALAT ET TOVTAT MAR COCIDO VOTO FECIT VITALIS' and gives the findspot as unknown; inscription in Crosthwaite Museum http://www.roman-britain.org/epigraphy/rib_borders.htm The Clauss-Slaby Epigraphic database, on the other hand, does mention IOM but not Toutatis, and gives Cumberland Quarries as the location: 'I(ovi) O(ptimo) M(aximo) et / M(arti) / Coc(idio) vo/tu(m) feci/[t] Vita/[lis]' I have mailed the author of the 'roman britain' site for clarification.
Why is RIB 1897 mentioned? It has nothing to do with the subject: it says 'DIII LAT' http://www.roman-britain.org/epigraphy/rib_hadrianswall.htm --Nantonos 15:44, 21 July 2007 (UTC)
Fair use rationale for Image:By-toutatis-asterix.jpg
Image:By-toutatis-asterix.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 08:21, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
- Don't rush the intellectual race to the bottom! The pronunciation's Gaulish, of course, as it's a Gaulish name – in fact I think the British pronunciation at this time would have been the same as well. By the way, we should indicate phonemes // rather than phones  because it is quite impossible to know how the phonemes of Gaulish might have been realized in practice. Speakers of English or French can pronounce this name as they please; I assume, however, that most would prefer to know what pronunciation approximates to that of the ancient name. Q·L·1968 ☿ 13:30, 7 April 2008 (UTC)
Is Toutatis the same as all these other Celtic Mars-es?
I've noticed that Albiorix, Rigisamos and Caturix all redirect to this page, Toutatis. How can we be certain that these other names are epithets for, or local tribal versions of, Toutatis? After all, Belatucadrus and Camulos were also identified with Mars yet these have separate articles. Nodens is sometimes equated with Mars also. �It is important to remember that, just as the Greeks called by the names of their own gods those of Egypt, Persia, and Babylonia, so the Romans identified Greek, Teutonic, and Celtic gods with theirs. The identification was seldom complete, and often extended only to one particular function or attribute. But, as in Gaul, it was often part of a state policy, and there the fusion of cults was intended to break the power of the Druids. The Gauls seem to have adopted Roman civilisation easily, and to have acquiesced in the process of assimilation of their divinities to those of their conquerors. Hence we have thousands of inscriptions in which a god is called by the name of the Roman deity to whom he was assimilated and by his own Celtic name--Jupiter Taranis, Apollo Grannus, etc. Or sometimes to the name of the Roman god is added a descriptive Celtic epithet or a word derived from a Celtic place-name. Again, since Augustus reinstated the cult of the Lares, with himself as chief Lar, the epithet Augustus was given to all gods to whom the character of the Lares could be ascribed, e.g. Belenos Augustus. Cults of local gods became cults of the genius of the place, coupled with the genius of the emperor. In some cases, however, the native name stands alone. The process was aided by art. Celtic gods are represented after Greco-Roman or Greco-Egyptian models. Sometimes these carry a native divine symbol, or, in a few cases, the type is purely native, e.g. that of Cernunnos. Thus the native paganism was largely transformed before Christianity appeared in Gaul. Many Roman gods were worshipped as such, not only by the Romans in Gaul, but by the Gauls, and we find there also traces of the Oriental cults affected by the Romans. There were probably in Gaul many local gods, tribal or otherwise, of roads and commerce, of the arts, of healing, etc., who, bearing different names, might easily be identified with each other or with Roman gods. Cæsar's Mercury, Mars, Minerva, etc., probably include many local Minervas, Mars, and Mercuries. There may, however, have been a few great gods common to all Gaul, universally worshipped, besides the numerous local gods, some of whom may have been adopted from the aboriginal peoples of Western Europe. I think it is very arbitrary to suppose that the Interpretatio Romana is the best indicator of two theonyms defining the same deity. What other grounds do you have for subsuming all these theonyms under the umbrella of Toutatis? I move for there to be the freedom to have individual articles on each theonym with points raised about the possible identity of one god with another. —Preceding unsigned comment added by G.M.Gladehall G.M.Gladehall (talk) (talk • contribs) 18:02, 15 May 2008
- Indeed. We cannot be certain of this, and it would be more prudent to create new articles for each of these epithets presenting the small amount of information we have on each. The procedure by which 'Celtic Mercury' used to be mechanically identified with Lugus, 'Celtic Mars' with Toutatis, and so on, was ill-conceived and should be abandoned. Q·L·1968 ☿ 14:01, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
- Please do not change your contributions after other people have already reacted to the original version.
- Having read the new portions of your post, G.M.Gladehall, I have no idea what substantive problems you see with the article as currently written. If you have any properly sourced information you want to add, please go ahead. Q·L·1968 ☿ 18:57, 18 June 2008 (UTC)