How many people were in an average Celtic settlement (or tribe - not sure if they correspond as one to one) in the Iron Age?

My intuitive estimation is "from 100 to 5000".

I know the Iron Age is long enough but information on any time range would be nice.

  • 2
    Some evidence of research would be nice. Where have you looked? – Lars Bosteen Feb 8 at 14:57
  • 1
    Welcome to History:SE. What has your research shown you so far? Where have you already searched? What did you find? Please help us to help you. You might find it helpful to review the site tour and Help Centre and, in particular, How to Ask. – sempaiscuba Feb 8 at 14:58
  • 1
    @SerG - welcome to the site and thanks for asking an interesting question. Please don't reply in comments, but edit your question to address the issues raise. Like most SE sites, there is an implicit expectation that questions should contain preliminary research; nobody is being hostile, but it the questions matter to the way we do history here. Hope you get a good answer. – Mark C. Wallace Feb 8 at 16:29
  • 4
    I was trying to be helpful based on years of experience. Questions where OP replies in comments get more downvotes, get closed faster, and get poorer answers. Simply put, the question should contain evidence of prior research and should contain all the information needed to research the question. This is not uncommon across SE. It shows courtesy for people who are doing the research. – Mark C. Wallace Feb 8 at 16:43
  • 3
    @SerG The start of the Iron Age can be between 1200BCE & 500BCE, depending on where in Europe you are talking about. The "Celts" (as in speakers of one of the Celtic languages) eventually had a geographic spread that covered most of Europe. If we know what & where you are researching, we might be able to give a meaningful answer to your question (although I suspect in almost all cases that answer is going to be something like "we really don't know, and here's why ..."). That is why evidence of your prior research is important. – sempaiscuba Feb 8 at 19:06

Short answer: thousands.

For that, we must define "celtic". All modern folklore aside, fom a mere archeological point of view "celts" were the oppida building people, referred to as "Keltoi" by the Greek ~500BC. Archeologists usually mean the late pre-Roman iron age people when they speak of "Celts" in general, with the eponymous find site being La Tène in Lake Neuchâtel. Though we don't say "culture", rather "time" or "period" because culture has a different meaning for different people. La-Tène time spans ~400 years (~450BC until Romans).

But that definition is not allways followed strictly. Often times, Hallstatt (early Iron Age in Europe) is included in "celtic" times.

Some of the best researched oppida are Bibracte (up to 30,000 inhabitants when the Romans made their debut).

http://www.bibracte.fr/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibracte

and Manching.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oppidum_of_Manching (maybe 10,000 inhabitants)

and a list of many more can easily be found when searching "Oppidum". Some of them were surrounded by really huge earth works or situated on spurs in the landscape, fortified by "Murus Gallicus", a terminus technicus coined by J. C.

Sorry for all the Wikipedia, hope the contents aren't that far from archaeological evidence. Can provide more info when necessary.

A note on sources:
It is not trivial to find something in English and iron age is not my specialty, but I found a recent paper on other types of settlement (not enclosed as the oppida) around late La Tène and in the orbit of Bibracte, for the archeologically interested. (Sure, an iron age guru could easily link to more information on the matter). It is better than the Wikipedia stuff, which serves as a rough outline at best.

  • 1
    Yes, I really was interested in "La Tene culture" and I had found some info about oppidums but not specifically about population. And also I was in doubt about oppid's averageness (may be it's like a capital or administration). – SerG Feb 8 at 16:20
  • The function is not clearly known. Some of them were large enough to hold their inhabitants + farmland + animals. When searching further, take with a shovel of salt anything that refers to religion or social stratification because that is mostly speculation. Prehistory has nothing but material remains, soil, stratea, isotopes, pollen, bones, varves, tree rings, ... that sort of things :-) – user41956 Feb 8 at 16:42
  • 1
    Actually, most archaeologists I know avoid using the term "Celt", except to mean a person who spoke one of the Celtic languages. The geographic and temporal ranges are just too large for the term to be meaningful beyond that. As for the size of settlements, the truth is that we have no idea. Oppida are found from Britain to the Hungarian plains and as far south as Spain. Their size varies enormously, and we don't fully understand their function. The fact the Caesar used the term means he thought of some as "settlements", but that's about it. – sempaiscuba Feb 8 at 18:58
  • Other way round. We don't really know in what relation these groups all stood and what language(s) they spoke. Some things can be inferred or "suspected" How could we know, it is gone. But we do know some of their settlements, arrangements inside and outside of the places, craftmenship, trade and relation to the surrounding or even far away places. Part of their material culture came upon us, that's why. – user41956 Feb 8 at 19:08
  • 1
    We certainly don't know what percentage of the population actually lived in those oppida, and we know very little about settlements outside the oppida. – sempaiscuba Feb 8 at 19:09

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.