This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Imperator totius Hispaniae article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The title of this article is incorrect, even if Imperator totius Hispaniae has been tradicionaly translated as Emperor of all Spain or Emperor of Spain. Notice that, before the emergence of the modern country of Spain (beginning with the union of Castile and Aragon in 1492), the Latin word Hispania, in any of the Iberian Romance languages, either in singular or plural forms (in English: Spain or Spains), was used to refer to the whole of the Iberian Peninsula, and not exclusively, as in modern usage, to the country of Spain, thus excluding Portugal. Iberia or Hispania, covers not only the modern country of Spain, but Portugal also. The word "Spain" in modern English (and its counterparts in other languages) means the country of Spain, not the whole of the Iberian peninsula (as the respective articles show). The fact is that Castillian expansionism over the centuries (ask not only the Portuguese, but also the Galicians, the Basques or the Catalans...) tried to monopolize the definition of Iberia in a way that satisfied its imperial interests. In fact, even if Spain was used in ancient times to refer to the whole of Iberia, today it is not. In this sense, given that the Kingdom of Spain only emerges with the union of Castille and Aragon in 1492 (and this is disputed since Navarre was only incoporated in 1512), one can almost say that there was never a Spain before that! It was Iberia that was conquered by the Romans, who called it Hispania. The country of Spain didn't exist then. It was Hispania that was conquered by Suevi, Vandals, Alans and Visigoths. The country of Spain didn't exist then. It was Visigothic Hispania that was conquered by the Moors. The country of Spain didn't exist then. The Moorish conquest was of Iberia or Hispania (that should not be confused with Spain, even if the term Hispanic is used to denote Spanish speaking peoples). This conquest and subsequent occupation led to a Christian reaction know as the Reconquista from which several Christian kingdoms emerged (such as Asturias, León, Castille, Portugal, Navarre, etc.). Over time Castille came to dominate most of Iberia (but not Portugal, except for a small period between 1580 and 1640) and the use of the castillian word "España" (which is the castillian version of latin Hispania) started as a political strategy to curb autonomy or independence from centralist Madrid (for the same reason Castillian language started to be known as Spanish, implying the irrelevance of other Iberian languages - this was still a problem in the Spain of the 20th century, with the active repression of languages other than Castillian - look up the article on Nationalities in Spain). Furthermore, if you call Spain to the Iberian peninsula or to Hispania, this not only is simply not true, but is felt as profoundly offensive at least by the Portuguese. For all these reasons and more, I'm changing the title of this article to the Latin version Imperator totius Hispaniae. The Ogre 15:14, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi everybody! Note that Spain is not technically a "translation of Hispania", but its etymological product. Meanwhile, if Srnec is right that Spain, in certain historical contexts, applies to the whole Iberian Peninsula, it is also true that this is an encyclopedia (where the possibility of confusions should especially be avoided), that this encyclopedia's article on Spain concerns only the present day country, that the present meaning of Spain concerns only the present country, that Spaniard denotes only... you know... Spaniards, that there are alternative ways to refer to the whole peninsula (e.g. "Iberian Peninsula"), and that, in a historical context, the use of the Latin word Hispania is easily understood and preferably applied. Velho 19:12, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
The medieval meaning of Hispania was definitely not independent from its Roman meaning. Rather, it was the continuation of it. This only changed when the United Kingdom of Castile, Navarre and Aragon was formed in the 15th century. The only reason why "Spain" is considered equivalent to "Iberian Peninsula" in historical periods which precede the 15th century is the inertia of historians. Having said this, I have no objection to translating the phrase Imperator totius Hispaniae as "Emperor of all Spain". It made sense at the time, and foreshadowed the ambitions of the Catholic monarchs which eventually founded the real Spain. FilipeS 15:07, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
"and escaped again during the Napoleonic Wars?"
lol
" Why does the last one stand out? "
Because Portugal its an Independent Nation with more than 900 years of independance(and with ancestry in Lusitania, Gallaecia, Suevic kingdom and Braga as its capital, the same city wich claim eclesiatic and political supremacy prerrogativs against Toledo and Compostela supremact attempts in the time of the Count Henry and his son King Afonso Henriques. (and the previous C. of Portucale was from 868)
See in XVI Epic: Noble "Hespanha", "De diferentes nações se engrandece" - "Os Lusiadas"
Portugal, since 1139 was a nation completly separeted from Castile, Aragon and Navarre etc.(some times already called Kingdom "Hispaniae" after Catholic kings around 1512 and oficial "Hispania" or "Spain" only after 1715 - Nueva Planta) much centuries before 1580 and since 1640 to nowdays(and in those 60 years was only a Crown union with sep. Adm. for the diverse kingdoms and its empires or possessions), so what you mean as "again" or "napoleonic wars"? Avoid spanish pseudo-nacionalistic "idiocracy" agenda please, even more if you haven´t nothing to do with such agenda(This advice is for all, no matter the nationality).
Old English("Germanic language") also used "Hispania" I think from latin Hispaniae, wich became Spain - as Espain and other names in Gaelic("Celtic") languages also in northen and british geography. And to avoid confusion with modern political Spain we should write Hispania even in english(but this last word shall be to English language Investigators and filologists). Any way, in any case aply the latin term in "italic" as a second solution... as it was. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.113.163.75 ( talk) 18:22, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
"was that Portugal is no different from Aragon, Catalonia, Navarre, Valencia, etc." we understand your right point, altough Portugal have a sense of "patria" and "nation" since Medieval chronistes, as Fernão Lopes and others(discriptions of the Country and its People) with some Iberian near paralels also with its same own sense, but not in all those Kigdoms within the Crowns of Castile or Aragon, Crowns each one as whole had also some of that sense in lower Midle Ages. Transiion to modern Era: The first great(with that greateness) Epic dedicated to one nationality, to one "Patria", to a "Nação" on that period of "life time"(1512-1580) in the years 1550s-1572 in Europe was "Os Lusíadas" altough the "Cronica de Clarimundo"(Romance), "Decadas da Asia"(History) and many other cronicles and epics of that time in Portugal had all that same national goal, amongst many others.
The first Castilian grammar(XV(XVI) centuries), the first Portuguese grammar(XVI cent.)
On the subject of the article: that "Spain" in Middle ages was a geographic term and this "Spain" today is a country, a state, even a nation for some or many spaniards, any way, is a state as others in Europe, in Iberian P. and outside Iberian Peninsula in Europe.
We need the term "Hispania" for Middle Ages to avoid confusion with modern Spain - common sense, as the ancient Iberia in a modern and nowadays sense to geography. Altough in Leovigildo times, after the conquest of Suebi Kingdom of Gallaecia(and northen Lusitania), the Visigotic King in respect to western Suevic Kingdom indentity diferent of that of Visigothic Hispania, wrote: “Leovigildus Rex Gallaecia, Hispania et Gallia Narbonensis”, and the Churchs “In provinciam Galliae vel Galliciae atque in omnes provincias Hispaniae” and the Churchs of “Spaniae, Galliae vel Galliciae”. This Hispania here was not all Iberian Peninsula, as for the Muslims Al-Jalica(Galicia-northwest versus Al-Andaluz-Spania/Isbania, the most part at that time). Of course these were some exceptions to the use of the common name of Hispania/Iberia for the Iberian Peninsula. But this is another point. Avoid confusion between diferent identities for the readers. This is the point here.
About 1580-1640 - Habsburg union, old Hispania it is yet a geographic-Peninsula name, above all for Portuguese People, but Habsburgs recognize sometimes the difference between the Crowns of Castile, Aragon, Navarre and Granada(even with its own separate states, languages and law each one) as new homeland, Spain, for one side; and for another side, the rest of european and world realms and principates under its Habsburg crown, among them Portugal (until 1640), even though it is an nation of western Iberian P..
From some Seals and Portraits of Philip II and I:
"PHILIPPUS II HISPANIAR ET LUSITANIAE REX DIVI CAROLI V...ISABELLA EMANUELIS LUSITANIAE REGIS F. CAROLI V IMP. MAX. UXOR"
"PHILIPPUS DEI GRATIA REX HISPANIARVM VTRIVSQVE SICILIAE HIERVSALEM ET PORTVGALLIAE"
Spain derives from Hispania etymologically, no doubt about it. The question is another: it is necessary to distinguish the ancient Hispania-Iberian Peninsula/ Roman Hispania/ Suebi and Visigothic Hispania etc.of the the current Spain, without confusion. "Hispania" is a good solution.
Is there any documented evidence that the modern title King of Spain is not in fact analogous to the Imperial title? Could not the adoption of King of Spain in the 18th century be in fact the ressurection of the imperial title in light of the fact that even in the 12th and 13th century they used the latin title "King"/ "Queen" of Spain? So far in my research I have not found evidence that it is not. ♦Drachenfyre♦· Talk 10:58, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Menendez Pidal, 1950, provides numerous additional examples of the Imperial title in use. I am not familiar enough with the more recent work to know whether this material is no longer thought reliable, but he shows the imperial title being used for Alfonso III (whose "Adelfonsus in omni Spania regnaturus" must be considered as equivalent), Ordono II, Ramiro II, Ordono III, etc. Maybe someone else can take a look at this. He also suggests that the reference to Sancho I as emperor is possible due to confusion with Sancho III (the Roda transcript dating to after the reign of the latter), a possibility that perhaps merits mention, as perhaps do the erroneous transcripts calling Garcia Fernandez of Castile emperor. Agricolae ( talk) 19:17, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Srnec, what an impressive and great improvement for the article!!! Thank you very much! I have made a few minor edits and one minor reformatting (adding Urraca to the line of rulers from Leon). Urraca's use of the title could be explored a bit more too. But in general I'm greatly impressed and thankful for your contrabutions! ♦Drachenfyre♦· Talk 06:15, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
I have moved this article because its title was just not right, but I'm none too sure about my chosen destination. I just translated the term that I find as the title of two comprehensive articles on the subject and its historiography, one in Italian and one in Spanish. I'd love to see better suggestions. — Srnec ( talk) 04:02, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
So, have we come to a consensus about the title? Change it to Emperor of Spain? Or Emperor of All Spain? ♦Drachenfyre♦· Talk 04:25, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
It seems the consensus gravitates towards Emperor of Spain. I agree that the article should clearly different between the Spain/Iberia of the title Emperor of Spain, and the modern kingdom of Spain. But to be honest, I have not seen any ... text which states that the historic Spain/Iberia is not indeed the same Spain as is the modern nation. I've looked but there doesn't seem to be any sources that comment one way or another regarding the imperial title and the modern King of Spain title... perhaps the modern title 'King of Spain' is in fact meant to hearken back to the Imperial title to some extent? While I acknowledge that there may be a difference, I would like to see text that states the imperial title and the modern title king of Spain does not in fact refer to the same location ♦Drachenfyre♦· Talk 04:59, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, the title is indented and I dont know why. ♦Drachenfyre♦· Talk 16:37, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Imperator totius Hispaniae. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:44, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Imperator totius Hispaniae article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The title of this article is incorrect, even if Imperator totius Hispaniae has been tradicionaly translated as Emperor of all Spain or Emperor of Spain. Notice that, before the emergence of the modern country of Spain (beginning with the union of Castile and Aragon in 1492), the Latin word Hispania, in any of the Iberian Romance languages, either in singular or plural forms (in English: Spain or Spains), was used to refer to the whole of the Iberian Peninsula, and not exclusively, as in modern usage, to the country of Spain, thus excluding Portugal. Iberia or Hispania, covers not only the modern country of Spain, but Portugal also. The word "Spain" in modern English (and its counterparts in other languages) means the country of Spain, not the whole of the Iberian peninsula (as the respective articles show). The fact is that Castillian expansionism over the centuries (ask not only the Portuguese, but also the Galicians, the Basques or the Catalans...) tried to monopolize the definition of Iberia in a way that satisfied its imperial interests. In fact, even if Spain was used in ancient times to refer to the whole of Iberia, today it is not. In this sense, given that the Kingdom of Spain only emerges with the union of Castille and Aragon in 1492 (and this is disputed since Navarre was only incoporated in 1512), one can almost say that there was never a Spain before that! It was Iberia that was conquered by the Romans, who called it Hispania. The country of Spain didn't exist then. It was Hispania that was conquered by Suevi, Vandals, Alans and Visigoths. The country of Spain didn't exist then. It was Visigothic Hispania that was conquered by the Moors. The country of Spain didn't exist then. The Moorish conquest was of Iberia or Hispania (that should not be confused with Spain, even if the term Hispanic is used to denote Spanish speaking peoples). This conquest and subsequent occupation led to a Christian reaction know as the Reconquista from which several Christian kingdoms emerged (such as Asturias, León, Castille, Portugal, Navarre, etc.). Over time Castille came to dominate most of Iberia (but not Portugal, except for a small period between 1580 and 1640) and the use of the castillian word "España" (which is the castillian version of latin Hispania) started as a political strategy to curb autonomy or independence from centralist Madrid (for the same reason Castillian language started to be known as Spanish, implying the irrelevance of other Iberian languages - this was still a problem in the Spain of the 20th century, with the active repression of languages other than Castillian - look up the article on Nationalities in Spain). Furthermore, if you call Spain to the Iberian peninsula or to Hispania, this not only is simply not true, but is felt as profoundly offensive at least by the Portuguese. For all these reasons and more, I'm changing the title of this article to the Latin version Imperator totius Hispaniae. The Ogre 15:14, 24 September 2006 (UTC)
Hi everybody! Note that Spain is not technically a "translation of Hispania", but its etymological product. Meanwhile, if Srnec is right that Spain, in certain historical contexts, applies to the whole Iberian Peninsula, it is also true that this is an encyclopedia (where the possibility of confusions should especially be avoided), that this encyclopedia's article on Spain concerns only the present day country, that the present meaning of Spain concerns only the present country, that Spaniard denotes only... you know... Spaniards, that there are alternative ways to refer to the whole peninsula (e.g. "Iberian Peninsula"), and that, in a historical context, the use of the Latin word Hispania is easily understood and preferably applied. Velho 19:12, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
The medieval meaning of Hispania was definitely not independent from its Roman meaning. Rather, it was the continuation of it. This only changed when the United Kingdom of Castile, Navarre and Aragon was formed in the 15th century. The only reason why "Spain" is considered equivalent to "Iberian Peninsula" in historical periods which precede the 15th century is the inertia of historians. Having said this, I have no objection to translating the phrase Imperator totius Hispaniae as "Emperor of all Spain". It made sense at the time, and foreshadowed the ambitions of the Catholic monarchs which eventually founded the real Spain. FilipeS 15:07, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
"and escaped again during the Napoleonic Wars?"
lol
" Why does the last one stand out? "
Because Portugal its an Independent Nation with more than 900 years of independance(and with ancestry in Lusitania, Gallaecia, Suevic kingdom and Braga as its capital, the same city wich claim eclesiatic and political supremacy prerrogativs against Toledo and Compostela supremact attempts in the time of the Count Henry and his son King Afonso Henriques. (and the previous C. of Portucale was from 868)
See in XVI Epic: Noble "Hespanha", "De diferentes nações se engrandece" - "Os Lusiadas"
Portugal, since 1139 was a nation completly separeted from Castile, Aragon and Navarre etc.(some times already called Kingdom "Hispaniae" after Catholic kings around 1512 and oficial "Hispania" or "Spain" only after 1715 - Nueva Planta) much centuries before 1580 and since 1640 to nowdays(and in those 60 years was only a Crown union with sep. Adm. for the diverse kingdoms and its empires or possessions), so what you mean as "again" or "napoleonic wars"? Avoid spanish pseudo-nacionalistic "idiocracy" agenda please, even more if you haven´t nothing to do with such agenda(This advice is for all, no matter the nationality).
Old English("Germanic language") also used "Hispania" I think from latin Hispaniae, wich became Spain - as Espain and other names in Gaelic("Celtic") languages also in northen and british geography. And to avoid confusion with modern political Spain we should write Hispania even in english(but this last word shall be to English language Investigators and filologists). Any way, in any case aply the latin term in "italic" as a second solution... as it was. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.113.163.75 ( talk) 18:22, 8 July 2009 (UTC)
"was that Portugal is no different from Aragon, Catalonia, Navarre, Valencia, etc." we understand your right point, altough Portugal have a sense of "patria" and "nation" since Medieval chronistes, as Fernão Lopes and others(discriptions of the Country and its People) with some Iberian near paralels also with its same own sense, but not in all those Kigdoms within the Crowns of Castile or Aragon, Crowns each one as whole had also some of that sense in lower Midle Ages. Transiion to modern Era: The first great(with that greateness) Epic dedicated to one nationality, to one "Patria", to a "Nação" on that period of "life time"(1512-1580) in the years 1550s-1572 in Europe was "Os Lusíadas" altough the "Cronica de Clarimundo"(Romance), "Decadas da Asia"(History) and many other cronicles and epics of that time in Portugal had all that same national goal, amongst many others.
The first Castilian grammar(XV(XVI) centuries), the first Portuguese grammar(XVI cent.)
On the subject of the article: that "Spain" in Middle ages was a geographic term and this "Spain" today is a country, a state, even a nation for some or many spaniards, any way, is a state as others in Europe, in Iberian P. and outside Iberian Peninsula in Europe.
We need the term "Hispania" for Middle Ages to avoid confusion with modern Spain - common sense, as the ancient Iberia in a modern and nowadays sense to geography. Altough in Leovigildo times, after the conquest of Suebi Kingdom of Gallaecia(and northen Lusitania), the Visigotic King in respect to western Suevic Kingdom indentity diferent of that of Visigothic Hispania, wrote: “Leovigildus Rex Gallaecia, Hispania et Gallia Narbonensis”, and the Churchs “In provinciam Galliae vel Galliciae atque in omnes provincias Hispaniae” and the Churchs of “Spaniae, Galliae vel Galliciae”. This Hispania here was not all Iberian Peninsula, as for the Muslims Al-Jalica(Galicia-northwest versus Al-Andaluz-Spania/Isbania, the most part at that time). Of course these were some exceptions to the use of the common name of Hispania/Iberia for the Iberian Peninsula. But this is another point. Avoid confusion between diferent identities for the readers. This is the point here.
About 1580-1640 - Habsburg union, old Hispania it is yet a geographic-Peninsula name, above all for Portuguese People, but Habsburgs recognize sometimes the difference between the Crowns of Castile, Aragon, Navarre and Granada(even with its own separate states, languages and law each one) as new homeland, Spain, for one side; and for another side, the rest of european and world realms and principates under its Habsburg crown, among them Portugal (until 1640), even though it is an nation of western Iberian P..
From some Seals and Portraits of Philip II and I:
"PHILIPPUS II HISPANIAR ET LUSITANIAE REX DIVI CAROLI V...ISABELLA EMANUELIS LUSITANIAE REGIS F. CAROLI V IMP. MAX. UXOR"
"PHILIPPUS DEI GRATIA REX HISPANIARVM VTRIVSQVE SICILIAE HIERVSALEM ET PORTVGALLIAE"
Spain derives from Hispania etymologically, no doubt about it. The question is another: it is necessary to distinguish the ancient Hispania-Iberian Peninsula/ Roman Hispania/ Suebi and Visigothic Hispania etc.of the the current Spain, without confusion. "Hispania" is a good solution.
Is there any documented evidence that the modern title King of Spain is not in fact analogous to the Imperial title? Could not the adoption of King of Spain in the 18th century be in fact the ressurection of the imperial title in light of the fact that even in the 12th and 13th century they used the latin title "King"/ "Queen" of Spain? So far in my research I have not found evidence that it is not. ♦Drachenfyre♦· Talk 10:58, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
Menendez Pidal, 1950, provides numerous additional examples of the Imperial title in use. I am not familiar enough with the more recent work to know whether this material is no longer thought reliable, but he shows the imperial title being used for Alfonso III (whose "Adelfonsus in omni Spania regnaturus" must be considered as equivalent), Ordono II, Ramiro II, Ordono III, etc. Maybe someone else can take a look at this. He also suggests that the reference to Sancho I as emperor is possible due to confusion with Sancho III (the Roda transcript dating to after the reign of the latter), a possibility that perhaps merits mention, as perhaps do the erroneous transcripts calling Garcia Fernandez of Castile emperor. Agricolae ( talk) 19:17, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Srnec, what an impressive and great improvement for the article!!! Thank you very much! I have made a few minor edits and one minor reformatting (adding Urraca to the line of rulers from Leon). Urraca's use of the title could be explored a bit more too. But in general I'm greatly impressed and thankful for your contrabutions! ♦Drachenfyre♦· Talk 06:15, 6 May 2010 (UTC)
I have moved this article because its title was just not right, but I'm none too sure about my chosen destination. I just translated the term that I find as the title of two comprehensive articles on the subject and its historiography, one in Italian and one in Spanish. I'd love to see better suggestions. — Srnec ( talk) 04:02, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
So, have we come to a consensus about the title? Change it to Emperor of Spain? Or Emperor of All Spain? ♦Drachenfyre♦· Talk 04:25, 18 August 2010 (UTC)
It seems the consensus gravitates towards Emperor of Spain. I agree that the article should clearly different between the Spain/Iberia of the title Emperor of Spain, and the modern kingdom of Spain. But to be honest, I have not seen any ... text which states that the historic Spain/Iberia is not indeed the same Spain as is the modern nation. I've looked but there doesn't seem to be any sources that comment one way or another regarding the imperial title and the modern King of Spain title... perhaps the modern title 'King of Spain' is in fact meant to hearken back to the Imperial title to some extent? While I acknowledge that there may be a difference, I would like to see text that states the imperial title and the modern title king of Spain does not in fact refer to the same location ♦Drachenfyre♦· Talk 04:59, 19 August 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, the title is indented and I dont know why. ♦Drachenfyre♦· Talk 16:37, 22 August 2010 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Imperator totius Hispaniae. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 10:44, 12 November 2017 (UTC)