Talk:Cruthin

There are a number of problems with the content as stated. In particular:

It is far from certain that the Picts spoke a Celtic (or even Indo-European) language, as the article on the Picts states.

It is apparently false to say, as the article does, that the custom of body-painting had died out among all other Celts at the time of Roman contact. This custom was still practised among the British and Irish, as Caesar said in his Gallic Wars.

--Saforrest 20:18, August 26, 2005 (UTC)

I've revised the bit about the Cruithne being identified with Picts to make it clear that this derives from O'Rahilly's model, which is influential but not universally accepted. As for the body-painting, it's true that Caesar refers to the practice in Britain (although he doesn't mention Ireland) in the 1st century BC. However the word Pict first appears in Roman writings about the 3rd century, so by the time the Romans were calling them that the practice had died out elsewhere. --Nicknack009 21:55, 26 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

To the user (66.32.112.142) who changed this article to read that the Cruithne were non-Celtic and non-Indo-European, I've reverted what you wrote because it distorted O'Rahilly's argument. It may be that the Cruithne were not Celtic-speaking, but O'Rahilly argued that they were, and didn't claim they were the first ethnic group to inhabit the British Isles as you had him say. O'Rahilly's arguments are far from universally accepted and I'm sure other scholars claim otherwise, but I'd ask you to make their arguments without making a scholar you don't agree with appear to say something he didn't, and cite sources. --Nicknack009 18:10, 24 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid that the reliance of this article on a single view, one which which is not the mainstream view of scholars makes it highly unreliable. I suggest that a substantial rewrite will be required in order to represent current knowledge about the historical Cruithne.