Talk:Numidia

Claim

(note that this claim is not widely accepted among archeologists) i know that every who say anything about the berber is claiming . but do it in the article .okke ?.Aziri 14:51, 13 Jul 2004 (UTC)

After Pompey was defeated by Caesar, he committed suicide (46 BCE) in Numidia, and it became briefly the province of Africa Nova until Augustus restored Juba II (son of Juba I) after the Battle of Actium. To whom does "he committed suicide" refer? Certainly not Pompey, who was murdered on the orders of Ptolemy XIII. The native prince who was ruling the Numidia at the time of Pompey's death? Needs clarification. -- cwp

It was Juba I (a former supporter of Pompey) who killed himself in 46 BC, while Pompey was killed and defeated a couple of years earlier in Egypt.

contradiction?

Currently, the article says this:

"The Numidians were conceived of as two great tribal groups: the Massyli in eastern Numidia, and the Massaesyli in the west. At the time of the Second Punic War the eastern tribes took the side of the Romans, whereas the Massaesyli supported the Carthaginians. At the end of the war the victorious Romans gave all of Numidia to Massinissa (died 148 BC) of the Massaesyli, whose territory extended from Mauretania to the boundary of the Carthaginian territory, and also southeast as far as Cyrenaica, so that Numidia entirely surrounded Carthage (Appian, Punica, 106) except towards the sea."

This is what I got from the above quotes:

Eastern tribes=Massyli=Roman supporters=victors
Western tribes=Massaesyli=Carthaginian supporters=losers

So how does it make any sense that the Romans gave the Massaesyli Numidia when the Romans won, if the Massaesyli were the supporters of the enemy who lost? This needs clarification or correction. Drenched 04:59, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

the romans didn't give anything, the annexed territories are rightful claims of Massylia that were taken over by Massinissa after the Battle of Zama against Hannibal. the romans were happy to reduce the territory controlled by carthage and did not protest a Numidian expansion in that direction Libernius (talk) 08:03, 12 November 2023 (UTC) (Blocked sock of Danju87)

Why does Numidium redirect here?

Anyone? The two are unrelated. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Zelphi (talk • contribs) 14:46, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Numidium was a delieted page and some fool tought they are the same thing.86.45.75.180 (talk) 21:22, 6 December 2008 (UTC)

Numidia modern days ?

how comes that Numidia in our modernday is Algeria and not Tunisia or Morocco? considering the number of Numidian decendant in all the three countries ( Algeria 70% of citizen are berber) = 25mio (Morocco 80% of citizen are berber) = 15mio and ( tunisia 20% are berber ) = 2 mio,

imho the article should use "north africa" instead of stating one country. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.227.34.190 (talk) 12:04, 29 February 2012 (UTC)

• All this is Original Research. Thanks to read WP:OR, WP:V and WP:RS. --Omar-toons (talk) 22:37, 12 November 2012 (UTC)
  • Hello,
    Since you didn't add any source, I reverted your edit (again).
    Also, the map you added seems to be OR (hand made, sourced on its commons description by a forum thread), that's why I reverted it to the previous one.
    Thanks for understanding.
    --Omar-toons (talk) 02:56, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

rouk nik yemmek 45.64.240.186 (talk) 02:29, 2 October 2023 (UTC)

its algeria because the capital of numidia is Cirta, the tribe that created Numidia is Massyli tribe in Aures known today as Chaoui people.

The Morroccans are a different tribe called Mauri by the romans, they did not contribute to the establishment of numidia.

Tunisians are generally considered carthagenians at the time Libernius (talk) 08:06, 12 November 2023 (UTC) (Blocked sock of Danju87)

intro paragraph has a made up word in it.

"Numidia diriged by Syphax" this "diriged" is not a word, i suspect the author meant divided, but i'm not sure. please get this fixed asap, looks pretty silly 188.220.151.59 (talk) user teknotiss, couldn't be bothered to sign in

Your Correct He ment Divided. go ahead and make the change to that word. you have a eagle i and spoted a notable diffrence. 76.244.145.11 (talk) 18:43, 25 December 2012 (UTC)

Numedia

couple of typos showing in search for articles misspelling as Numedia... In ictu oculi (talk) 02:44, 17 July 2014 (UTC)

War With Rome Citation Needed

I haven't figured out how to edit the citation needed but have the citation for the last sentence in the War With Rome section. Livy's Periochae 66-70, in Book 67.4 "During the triumph of Gaius Marius, Jugurtha walked in front of the chariot with his two sons, and was killed in the jail."

Here's the link: http://www.livius.org/li-ln/livy/periochae/periochae066.html

Sallust doesn't actually come out and say in his history of the War with Jugurtha that Jugurtha was killed, just that he was captured. John C. Rolfe, the translator of the Loeb edition includes footnote 161, at the end saying, "Jugurtha was taken to Rome, where, after being led with his two sons before Marius's chariot in the triumphal procession, he was starved to death, or, according to some, strangled, in the Tullianum." Sadly he does not include a source for the starvation.

In the version is available here: http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Sallust/home.html

So if anyone reads this, if I can figure out how to change it I will, but I believe Livy's account should satisfy the citation needed. Jwt708 (talk) 17:38, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Etymology

As I mentionned in the text the famous historian specialized in berber history favors a native origin of the name, here is the paragraph in french, and I won't translate it because it is not a problem of evidence, there is just an idiot who is removing my edits:

Les Numides ont, en outre, été victimes d'un calembour, forme d'explication philologique très prisée des Anciens : alors que leur nom est certainement d'origine africaine comme le prouvent la persistance à l'époque romaine de tribus portant encore ce nom 2 et l'existence, dans la Mauritanie actuelle, de la population des Nemadi, les auteurs grecs confondirent l'ethnique africain et leur adjectif υομαδες. De cette fausse étymologie naquit l'affirmation légendaire qui devient un véritable cliché littéraire, que les Numides n'étaient que des Nomades, populations errantes sans agriculture, ni villes, ni lois.

for the idiot Kintetsubuffalo , who is removing all my edits, I've already asked for a moderator. Stylequick (talk) 15:06, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Juba II as King of Numidia

the Louvre.

Amyntas in 26, Cilicia was given to King Tarcondimotus. When Augustus added Juba II’s kingdom of Numidia to the province of Africa in 25, he gave Juba Mauretania (Morocco) to rule instead. In Armenia, on the Aspects of Roman History 82BC-AD14: A Source-based Approach By Mark Everson Davies, Hilary Swain

Encyclopedia of African History 3-Volume Set - Page 251 Kevin Shillington - 2013 - ?Preview - ?More editions Mauritania then, too, became involved in the civil wars of Rome, and the kingdom was annexed to Rome by Caesar Octavian in 33BCE and then reformulated as a client-kingdom in 25BCE with Juba II of Numidia as king. Juba, son of an ...

education in Italy. Octavian, the future emperor Augustus, befriended Juba when he was a young man and in 29 ».c. made him ruler of his father's former kingdom of Numidia, which had become a Roman province after the death of Juba I in 46

Herods Contemporaries In Britain And The West J Creighton - Herod and Augustus, 2008 - booksandjournals.brillonline.com … BCE the king of Mauretania died and for a few years this part of Africa was ruled directly by Rome, however in 25 BCE Augustus installed Juba II there as king, where he … Iconographically the coinage marks a radical shift between Juba I in Numidia and Juba II in Mauretania …

New Masters for Africa S Raven - Rome in Africa, 2012 - taylorfrancis.com … True, King Bocchus of Mauretania was rewarded for his support in the Thapsus campaign by being given the western part of Numidia; but after his death in 33 BC his kingdom was ruled directly by the Romans, and then handed over in 25 BC to Juba II, the romanized …

The Roman Maghreb K Amine, M Carlson - The Theatres of Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia, 2012 - Springer … 10 The Pre-Colonial Maghreb citizen, highly cultivated in the arts and natural history. The Emperor Augustus restored Juba II as king of Numidia between 29 BCE and 27 BCE and married him off to Cleopatra Selene, daughter of Cleopatra and Mark Anthony … Related articles

… of the largest cities of Roman North Africa. It also had a long and distinguished history, starting as a Punic colony; becoming a royal Numidian capital, perhaps from … TW Potter - cambridge.org … long and distinguished history, starting as a Punic colony; becoming a royal Numidian capital, perhaps from the second century BC, and most notably under the client king, Juba II (25 BC … is a fine theatre, built in Juba's reign; an unusual amphitheatre, perhaps Augustan in origin …

Doug Weller talk 13:54, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

Section: "The Kingdom of Massinissa and the Third Punic War"

The section "The Kingdom of Massinissa and the Third Punic War" could use a rewrite. Within the single paragraph, several names are inconsistently spelled across sentences. Acwilson9 (talk) 00:18, 11 July 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Emblem of Algeria.svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 15:16, 4 March 2023 (UTC)

Navy and Trade

Can someone clarify/explain what this first paragraph is trying to say? I've read it three times I still can't figure out what it's trying to say. 24.56.228.140 (talk) 03:36, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Languages of Numidia

Recently my edits featuring several different sources have been reverted. While i do not agree with removing edits which add 5 sources to the article simply because you liked the old version better, the edits were mainly changes done to the infobox, which don't give too much context. Throughout it's existence Numidia had 3 main languages, which were Libyco-Berber (Numidian), Punic, and Latin, alongside smaller and less used languages such as Greek. During it's first few decades of existence Punic alongside Numidian dominated the kingdom. Surviving governmental and official inscriptions survive in both Numidian and Punic such as those found in Dougga, or various surviving steles. Funerary inscriptions were nearly always done in Numidian. Coins were minted with Punic inscriptions on it. Inscriptions and votives made for dignitaries and nobles were mostly in Numidian. According to contemporary Roman sources, Numidians and Massinissa himself used Punic as a "diplomatic language", likely as it was one of the most influential languages in the Mediterranean.

However, by the late era of Numidia, Punic somewhat fell into disuse. Coins were no longer minted in Punic, instead Latin was used (however in some cases both were used) and even the diplomatic language seems to have changed to Latin. Greek became more and more influential with intermarriage and heavy influence from Ptolemaic Egypt. Juba II did not use Punic at all, and wrote all of his works in Greek, with one exception, "On Arabia" which seems to have been written in Latin.

Numidia did not have a singular truly "official" language in it's existence. The changes i want to implement are pretty simple, mainly using "Common languages" instead of continually changing the "Official languages" part, and possibly adding a new section to the article, with more sources to explain the status of the various languages used in Numidia throughout it's existence.

Whatever748 (talk) 10:24, 7 April 2023 (UTC)

That’s your own scholarship, the point is do you have a reliable source saying any of our mentioned language being “the official language of numidia” ?

there are abundant reliable sources saying that “punic was the official language of numidia”, you can’t challenge reliable sources by your own researches, you just mention a reliable source that says that. If you have a reliable source saying directly “latin was the official language of numidia” then you can add it, otherwise you can’t claim that a language was an official language by your own research because you found some latin minted coins.

here is another example of a source other than those included in the article stating directly that punic was the official language of kingdom of NumidiaThe Punic Mediterranean, p. 182, Cambridge University Press: “the fact that Punic was the official language of the Numidian kingdom from the reign of Massinissa on, used both for official inscriptions and for the legends on Numidian coins in Punic or neo-Punic script”

if you have a source saying directly “latin was/became official language in the kingdom of numidia” then you can add latin, otherwise you can’t.

Chafique (talk) 13:14, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

"That’s your own scholarship"

What does that even mean? What are you even talking about? None of the sources i cited are self-published, or unreliable in any way?

"there are abundant reliable sources saying that “punic was the official language of numidia”"

I never denied that, especially in the early phases of the Kingdom, Punic was the language of trade, diplomacy and coin minting. You are attacking a strawman here.

"used both for official inscriptions and for the legends on Numidian coins in Punic or neo-Punic script"

That is exactly what i said in the original reply? Did you even read it? Can you stop attacking a strawman, and stop being dishonest?

"latin was/became official language in the kingdom of numidia” then you can add latin, otherwise you can’t."

I have cited souch sources, yes, and you removed them, over, and over again.

There has never been a singular official language of Numidia, and if you would like to prove otherise, you would need to provide a contemporary source which says that. Like an official Numidian document, or even just a contemporary Roman account, which states the Punic was the sole official language of Numidia. In the sources you cited, these scholars base Punic's official status on the fact that coins were minted in Punic during the early era of the Kingdom (not to mention the fact that Punic was phased out completely by the later era of Numidia), which is cool, but that is not a justification for you removing well cited information. There exists surviving official Numidian royal inscriptions written in Punic, Latin and Libyco-Berber. As i said, i will go ahead, and edit in a well sourced section to talk about the various languages used inside of Numidia. You can go ahead and scour over the sources i cited in there if need be. Whatever748 (talk) 18:27, 9 April 2023 (UTC)

September 2023

To the IP: 1) what exactly does it say on that source that you added? 2) Since all the RS about Numidia don't mention Morocco, why do you think do so is a good idea? 3) Also, why did you remove Libya? M.Bitton (talk) 12:11, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

It shows a map where eastern Morocco, Northern Algeria and Southern Tunisia is Numidia. The claim that Numidia equals to Modern day Algeria is anschronistic and politically loaded, not historically accurate.

I did not remove Libya btw. At least not on porpoise.

What do you mean with RS? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:3037:400:39F4:58B5:613:950C:49F9 (talk) 12:41, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

That's your interpretation and therefore original research. Your claim of anachronism is baseless. RS means reliable sources. M.Bitton (talk) 12:44, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

That’s not my interpretation. Look at the map. It shows eastern Morocco.

You did not provide any Sources at all. So how is that better that my Scientific source? 2A02:3037:400:39F4:58B5:613:950C:49F9 (talk) 12:46, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Interpretation of a map is WP:OR. All the sources about Numidia don't mention Morocco for a reason (it wasn't part of it). M.Bitton (talk) 12:47, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Name one Source Mosti95 (talk) 15:30, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Here's one just for you. M.Bitton (talk) 21:57, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Algeria is not a Region.

It does not make Sense to say, that Numidia is part of the history of Algeria.

It is part of the history of North Africa (Which is modern day Algeria part of). Mosti95 (talk) 15:27, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Im referring to this sentence:

. It was one of the first major states in the history of Algeria and the Berbers.

it does not even have a source and is there fore Original Research. It should be removed. Mosti95 (talk) 15:45, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

This is strange, because original research didn't concern you when you changed to suit your pov. Anyway, what part of that sentence are you disputing? Was there a major state in present-day Algeria before Numidia? Did the Berbers create a major state before Numidia? M.Bitton (talk) 21:57, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

There is no source. This sentence is original research and should get deleted. Also Algeria is not a region. If you really wanna keep it, change Algeria to North Africa. 2A02:3033:20A:8713:7879:6FD0:279:4C (talk) 21:59, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Numidia: ancient country to the west of the territories of Carthage, more or less modern Algeria. utter nonsense!

If you keep refusing to answer the questions, I will rightly assume that you have nothing else to say. M.Bitton (talk) 22:03, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

You didn’t react to anything I said.

algeria is a Modern Day Country, not A Region. It should be changed to North Africa.

its weird that you accuse me of refusing answering while you dodge the answers while I actually answer and add content.

Remove the sentence since it is Original Research. Don’t Ego trip. 2A02:3033:20A:8713:7879:6FD0:279:4C (talk) 22:08, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

algeria is a Modern Day Country, not A Region So what? Numidia is part of the history of the modern country. In other words, your statement is 100% BS. M.Bitton (talk) 22:11, 18 September 2023 (UTC)

Removed table of numidian kings

User:M.Bitton can you explain why you removed the table of numidian kings ? also please site the contradictions in the page that you encountered ? Numidea (talk) 17:17, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

I already have (compare what you added to the List of kings of Numidia). Also, even if sourced, that table is not an improvement. M.Bitton (talk) 17:22, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

explain how it is not an improvement, and which contradictions you encountered please ? Numidea (talk) 17:24, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

A huge irrelevant table in the middle of article is clearly not an improvement. Once you find a source that describes "Atlas" as q king of Numidia, then you can add him to List of kings of Numidia (no need for a table). M.Bitton (talk) 17:27, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Did you read the source I included with Atlas being the ruler of North africa ?

if your contention is just atlas why did you remove the whole table instead of just atlas ? Numidea (talk) 17:31, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Numidia is not synonymous with North Africa. I won't repeat what I said about the huge and irrelevant table. M.Bitton (talk) 17:33, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

You did not answer my question concerning reading my source. Numidia is the region between Libya and Eastern Morocco, its more the 3/4 the area of all berber north africa, atlas ruled the Libyans and in Mythology he is considered the first king of all the berber people.

Would you like to have the table at the bottom of the page ? Numidea (talk) 17:37, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

I did answer your question and see no reason to keep repeating myself. You're welcome to seek consensus for the inclusion of a table that serves no purpose other than hinder the readability of the article. M.Bitton (talk) 17:40, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

you did not answer my question about reading my source on Atlas and whether or not you agree to put the table somewhere else to help with readability, please do so that we can resolve this problem and help contribute to the article. Numidea (talk) 17:43, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

I did and I'm done here. M.Bitton (talk) 17:43, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

I am not an established user yet so I cannot request a 3rd opinion yet, I will revert change to the table of numidian kings, I have read your page and you seem to have a relevant rank, please request a 3rd opinion on whether or not to remove the table Numidea (talk) 17:49, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

You don't need to be established to request a 3rd opinion or, better still, wait until someone else weighs in (as it will most likely be someone who's familiar with the subject). M.Bitton (talk) 17:54, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

I agree with Numidea. This user provided reliable sources and the table does add weight to the article. 2600:100F:B1BC:91BF:0:1B:8473:4E01 (talk) 14:30, 24 March 2024 (UTC)

pinging the last few users who edited the article (excluding a sock and two admins). @SupremeHusky, Nourerrahmane, and Skitash: could you please weigh in on this as all attempts at making the user Numidea understand that what they are adding to the article is not an improvement have been sidelined (they are edit warring on this as well as the List of kings of Numidia article). Apart from being huge and useless, the table also contains mythical kings such as Atlas that they are presenting as factual kings of the Numidian Kingdom. M.Bitton (talk) 18:54, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

I agree with you. The table is utterly useless. Besides the fact that the gigantic table adds clutter to the rest of the article and obscures vital content, it also includes kings who were either mythological characters or tribal chiefs, who had some sort of authority over Numidian tribes such as Massylii. This content falls outside the intended scope of the article, which aims to focus on the period of the kingdom's unification from 202 BC to 25 BC. Skitash (talk) 19:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

any reason you skipped a few there, you calling your buddies for help ? u skipped the following users :

User:Nd5eu2ur8b

User:Eievie

Special:Contributions/105.108.82.243 Numidea (talk) 20:03, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

I have no idea what I'm being called for. The only edit I ever made on this page was a single formatting fix. Eievie (talk) 22:29, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

I made a table illustrating Numidian kings before unification of numidia to highlight early history of numidia before massinissa, these guys keep deleting it. would you prefer if its kept there or removed ? Numidea (talk) 10:24, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Creating a table is not a good reason to impose it through an edit war. Please stop and pay attention to what the others are saying. M.Bitton (talk) 15:12, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

@M.Bitton you called your friend @Skitash to defend you on here and you sabotage page after page creating unnecessary edit wars. the table representing numidian kings organizes the page and makes it more readable. go have edit wars somewhere else. Numidea (talk) 15:19, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Please read WP:AGF and WP:ASPERSIONS. M.Bitton (talk) 15:21, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

• WP:CTW read and let people contribute to wikipedia pages.

Numidea (talk) 15:24, 17 January 2024 (UTC)

Support: Table is big and takes too much space and the content is a mix of non adequate pictures, personalities who were not sovereigns over the unified kingdom of Numidia (real or mythical), and the correct remaining information has its own article. So this doesn’t add useful material to the article. Nourerrahmane (talk) 20:05, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

@Skitash and Nourerrahmane: thank you for your input. Unfortunately, the editor is now adding it to the Numidians article. M.Bitton (talk) 21:46, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Edit the Native name in Infobox

Hello,

I would like to propose adding the name of Numidia in ancient Libyan instead of Punic, because the current native name in the infobox refers to the Massylii kingdom. I suggested this because I found a specialized source that mentions the name of the Kingdom of Numidia in Old Libyan (Numidian language).

I have also added this name in the lead section of the article.

What do you think of this proposal?

Best regards,

Mostasem gridi (talk) 02:25, 9 November 2025 (UTC)✍️

I suggest you refrain from editwarring, Punic is the official language of the Numidian Kingdom, which had its king Micipsa known as the "king of the massyli" in Punic based on Cherchell Neopunic inscriptions. "Inumiden" is a modern attribution which is nowhere to be found in reliable sources. Nourerrahmane (talk) 22:54, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

## **Proposed Correction: Capital and Royal Residences of Numidia** I am writing to propose a factual correction regarding the historical centers of the Numidian Kingdom. Based on archaeological evidence and UNESCO records

the current attribution of the primary capital requires more precision to reflect the central role of sites in modern-day Tunisia.

• • Key Corrections:**

* **Dougga (Thugga):** Historically recognized as a royal residence and a capital of an important Libyco-Punic state. It is documented as the birthplace of King Massinissa.
* **Cirta (Modern-day El Kef):** Historical and UNESCO-supported evidence identifies the Cirta associated with King Jugurtha’s birth and rule as modern-day El Kef, Tunisia, rather than Constantine.
* **The Table of Jugurtha:** This site served as a vital strategic stronghold and seat of power during Jugurtha’s resistance against Rome.
* **Bulla Regia:** Along with the aforementioned sites, Bulla Regia formed the administrative and royal core of the kingdom.

The current article lists Cirta (Constantine, Algeria) as the sole primary capital, which contradicts the geographic and archaeological record identifying these sites in Tunisia as the true seats of Numidian power. I request that the article be updated to reflect these established facts.

• • Sources:** * UNESCO World Heritage documentation for Dougga/Thugga.

* Archaeological records of the Table of Jugurtha and Bulla Regia.

1. 1. 1. **How to submit it:**

1. Go to the **Numidia** page on Wikipedia.
2. Click the **"Talk"** tab at the top left.
3. Click **"New section"** or **"Add topic"**.
4. Paste the draft above and click **"Publish changes"**.

Since you have the evidence from UNESCO, this is the most effective way to make sure the truth is officially recorded. ~2026-21958-65 (talk) 23:17, 9 April 2026 (UTC)

Hello ~2026-21958-65, Constantine is Cirta; it was the capital of the Massylii and the first capital of Numidia, maintaining this role until the Roman era, according to the consensus of all scientific references.

UNESCO registered Dougga as a capital of a Libyco-Punic entity but did not list it as the capital of Numidia. Rather, it was only suggested as a possibility due to the presence of ancient archaeological layers beneath the Roman town. There is no scientific confirmation of this. If there are any confirmations from prestigious universities or an academic consensus, share them so we can discuss it. Mostasem gridi (talk) 00:19, 3 May 2026 (UTC)

Native name

Nourerrahmane

The article discusses the "Unified Kingdom of Numidia," yet the cited source makes no mention of "Numidia" or the "Kingdom" as a political entity. Instead, the source explicitly refers to an individual rather than a state. The text clearly reads MLK [M]ŠLYYM HMYLL, which translates to "The lamented king of the Massylii." Furthermore, you have misrepresented the source by altering the term MLK to MMLKT. This constitutes a violation of Wikipedia:No original research (NOR) and source integrity.

So remove this erroneous information immediately to avoid misleading readers. Mostasem gridi (talk) 23:24, 4 May 2026 (UTC)

First of all, don’t order me around. Secondly, please check the source, MMLKT is very much present. Micipsa was the king of a united Numidia yet he was referred to as the king of the massyli. It’s perfectly reasonable to call his kingdom with that name knowing that his father masinissa literally took over the kingdom of Syphax in the west.

Lastly, please don’t edit war. Nourerrahmane (talk) 06:00, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

What is stated in the source does not match the citation you provided for the Native name, I have already clarified this point previously. The text is very clear this is a matter of Source Integrity. This article is about the Kingdom of Numidia, not Micipsa. You are engaging in Original Research (NOR) and have misrepresented the source.

​When a reader verifies the citation, they will find that the source material does not match the Native name listed in the article, which violates the Wikipedia:Verifiability policy. Despite this, you continue to insist on this error and disregard Wikipedia guidelines. There is no edit war here; this is an encyclopedia, and everyone must comply with its rules. Mostasem gridi (talk) 17:21, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

Irrelevant, you’re not really replying to my argument. A king of a unified Numidia addressed in Punic as “king of the massyli” leaves little doubt on the native name. You’re not adding this BS on my watch anyways. Nourerrahmane (talk) 21:17, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

As a major contributor to the article I reserve the right to take this to ANI the next time you’re removing anything reliably sourced in the article without prior consensus. Nourerrahmane (talk) 21:21, 5 May 2026 (UTC)

I've moved this to ANI. Continue the discussion there. Mostasem gridi (talk) 04:42, 8 May 2026 (UTC)

Historical Correction: Status of Thugga (Dougga) as a Numidian Capital

I am proposing a necessary clarification regarding the political organization of the Numidian Kingdom. The current article portrays Cirta/Constantine as the sole capital, which oversimplifies the administrative reality and contradicts both academic sources and international classifications.

It is historically inaccurate to present Numidia as a state with a single capital. In accordance with the research of Camps, Coarelli, and the records of UNESCO, the article should reflect that Thugga was a major political and religious capital of the kingdom. To ignore this fact is to present a truncated version of Numidian history.

1. Thugga: A Capital Recognized by UNESCO (ID 794)

UNESCO officially defines Thugga as the "capital of an important Libyco-Punic state" prior to Roman annexation. This international recognition confirms that Thugga was not merely a provincial town, but a sovereign center of the Numidian state.

2. Academic Evidence (Using Existing Bibliography):

• Coarelli & Thébert (1988): In their study on Numidian funerary architecture, they demonstrate that the Libyco-Punic Mausoleum of Thugga is a monumental expression of Numidian royal power. The presence of such a princely necropolis is a definitive attribute of a capital city.
• Gabriel Camps (1979): Camps documents the existence of a temple dedicated to the cult of King Masinissa at Thugga. The erection of a sanctuary for the dynasty's founder attests to the city's status as a religious and political capital.
• Stéphane Gsell: In his Histoire ancienne de l'Afrique du Nord, Gsell details Thugga’s autonomous administration (the GLD or Aguellid system), confirming its role as a major economic metropolis in the Medjerda Valley.

3. Geographical Consistency (Strabo XVII, 3, 13):

The testimony of Strabo places the Numidian capital in the hinterland between Hippo Regius (Annaba) and Hippo Diarrhytus (Bizerte). This specific geographical description excludes Constantine and points precisely to the Tunisian corridor where Thugga is located.

~~~~ Prof-Wolf-55 (talk) 12:16, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Request for NPOV Compliance: Acknowledging the status of Thugga as a Numidian Capital

I am not asking to delete Constantine; I am asking for Neutral Point of View (NPOV) as required by Wikipedia policy. When UNESCO (ID 794) officially classifies Thugga as a 'capital of a major Numidian state,' and primary sources like Strabo (17.3.13) provide coordinates that mathematically exclude Constantine, this is no longer a 'minority theory'—it is a documented geographical discrepancy that the article must reflect for the sake of academic integrity. Prof-Wolf-55 (talk) 12:23, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Archaeological evidence vs. Administrative tradition: The case for Thugga (Dougga)

My argument does not rely solely on Berthier. It relies on Coarelli & Thébert (1988) and Gabriel Camps (1979)—both of whom are already in this article’s bibliography. They provide the archaeological proof (the Masinissa Temple and the Royal Mausoleum) that Thugga functioned as a sovereign capital. We must prioritize these verified archaeological facts over 19th-century administrative traditions that often prioritized Roman continuity over Numidian reality. Prof-Wolf-55 (talk) 12:29, 11 May 2026 (UTC)

Hello, Prof-Wolf-55

​Try to merge the information and opinions in a single topic. A clear distinction must be made between Numidia as a unified political entity founded in 202 BC, and the royal confederations that preceded it, such as the Massylli and Masaesyli.

​Dougga is registered as a Roman town in UNESCO, and the article does not identify it as a capital for Numidia. Instead, we find it mentioned as the capital of an unknown Libyco-Punic entity, due to the multiple branches of the royal family. Dougga is associated with the "Sufetes" and was never an official capital. While it certainly played a major religious role, it did not rise to the level of an administrative capital for the kingdom. The presence of a royal temple there is not definitive proof, and even the sources you provided do not refer to Dougga as a capital. Strabo never mentioned that:

Cirta, then, is here, and so are the two Hippos, one near Itycê and the other farther away, rather towards Tretum.

— Strabo,

In addition to being a primary source, your interpretation of the coordinates and your attempt to locate the region constitutes original research (OR). Try to rely on reliable secondary sources for this discussion.

Thank you. Mostasem gridi (talk) 04:43, 3 June 2026 (UTC)

(WP:OR) and synthesis in native name

Should the combination of two distinct inscriptions to reconstruct a native name be accepted?

In this article, There is a (OR) synthesis of published material, where two different inscriptions are combined to infer a native name and then present it as the official name of the Kingdom of Numidia. Inscription A clearly reads "MLK [M]ŠLYYM HMYLL," which translates to 'The lamented king of the Massylii.' Inscription B mentions "MSNSN HMMLKT." The two texts have been manipulated and conflated to extract an official native name "MMLKT MŠLYYM." Mostasem gridi (talk) 19:04, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

I was pinged to this by a bot. I read through the above, the discussion prior to that, and the discussion at ANI. Is it possible that there is a source which just gives the native name directly? As to Mostaem, I want to note also that OR is when a claim is actually not reliably published anywhere. Ifly6 (talk) 22:31, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

I have searched for this claim, and there is absolutely no mention of it, even in the specialized local sources closest to the artifact. This is an epigraphic inscription, and its text cannot be subjected to speculative alterations or personal re-interpretations. The source currently cited in the article does not support the inferred name or the claim being made; this is a clear case of (WP:NOR) and (WP:V):

Wikipedia's content is determined by published information rather than editors' beliefs, experiences, or previously unpublished ideas or information. Even if you are sure something is true, it must have been published in a reliable source before you can add it... Each fact or claim in an article must be verifiable. Additionally, four types of information must be accompanied by an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the material.

— Wikipedia:Verifiability

If any reliable sources explicitly supporting this claim exist, they must be directly cited. Unless a reliable source that directly supports this material is provided, the unsourced claim must be removed. Mostasem gridi (talk) 17:04, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

This RfC does not comply with WP:RFCNEUTRAL. @Mostasem gridi could you edit the RfC to only include your question and then put your commentary below? Katzrockso (talk) 01:18, 17 June 2026 (UTC)

If Micipsa, the 2nd king of unified Numidia, is reffered to as the King of the massylii in punic, then it's all too logical to call his kingdom as such. The Masaesylian kingdom ceased to exist yet the Massyli kingdom did not since the latter annexed the former. At this date we have no record of a native name for whole of Numidia, as this name is greek in origins. Nourerrahmane (talk) 09:51, 17 June 2026 (UTC)