Talk:Kingdom of Valencia
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Only 1.2% of Jaime I's troops were Catalans, and they didnt even stay after the conquest, so stop writing valencian language developed from catalan language, because it comes from LATIN. they're SISTER TONGUES, but one doesn't come from the other one.
- The translation is in progress. You may want to help by enlarging the translation, but deleting sections is not helping, on the contrary; for not to mention that you did so without sources. Mountolive | Talk 07:03, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- I added the map "Christian conquest of the Kingdom of Valencia" to the article. It is not in its definitive place. Maurice27 02:33, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
-
- Just to interject, the statistic 1.2% sounds far to precise to be accurate and therefore is unbelievable. Whether the reality behind it is that Catalans were few among the Valencian conquerors or it is just wrong and based on bad methodology, I cannot tell. Furthermore, Catalan and Valencian are, as far as I know, not differentiable, really, as languages and therefore, whether the one developed out of the other or alongside it is like asking whether Canadian English grew out of or alongside American English. Srnec 07:11, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Lead
I edited this lead The Kingdom of Valencia was one of the component realms of the Crown of Aragon established by the union of the Principality of Catalonia and the Kingdom of Aragon in 1037. Valencia was, at that time, a Moorish city, but after its conquest, as the "successor" of the old taifa rulers, James the Conqueror took the title of "King of Valencia" and gave it its own cortes and government. The title lasted as subsidiary title of that of the King of Spain until 1707.
because it just seems wrong to me to go as deep in the lead as to detail the circumstances of the Crown of Aragón dawn. Those certainly belong in the lead of the Crown of Aragón, but not in the lead of the Kingdom of Valencia.
Following your suggestion, I have kept moors but I have redirected it to taifas, this way we got both for the price of one and the lead doesn't goes too much in detail.
"Subsidiary title of that of the King of Spain" is misleading as it was no less subsidiary as it was for the King of the Crown of Aragón. The kingdom of Spain back in the day was really-really decentralized and each kingdom was largely autonomous.
I am not so satisfied with my own "lasted until 1707". You seem a native English speaker thus, if you find a more proper word, please feel free to improve my wording. Mountolive | Talk 05:50, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
- ps. I am pretty much done with introducing more info myself in the article (even though the Splendour section should be enlarged and I may come back to that at some point). In other words, I have hit the wall and I consider the article pretty much completed from this end.
- This means that you may want to review it in order to amend all that clumsy wording resulting from my translation. Thanks Mountolive | Talk 05:54, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
Joanot, as you know very well, the Nueva Planta Decrees were issued in 1707 and the dynastic union of the Crown of Aragón to the Castile happened in 1492 without any war whatsoever.
I wonder...have you been waiting all these days while I was making the translation only for me to finish it and then when everything is done start with your bias? Please, help, mate. Don't start disrupting this one also. It's getting tiresome, my friend. Mountolive | Talk 07:51, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Not only self-government, but independence
It's not only self-government, but a complete independence. The only link to the Crown of Aragon or with the Spanish Empire is the King, but the promulgation of laws were always made by Valencian Courts (where the King has only 1/3 of seats). The only tariffs were collected by the Valencian Generalitat, and the Valencian Courts decide how much money to give to King (or not to give) in each case. All people outside of Valencia, including Castilians, Catalans, Aragonese, or Majorcans were legally considered as foreigners and have no same rights as the Valencians (including some Muslim Valencians -called tagarins- have more rights than Christian Castilians), etc. There were also own Valencian currency (Valencian rals, sous and quinzets). And the "Charters of Valencia" was not "allowed" but "granted". Previously, the Princeps must swear it in the Valencian Courts in order to be entronized as King of Valencia. --Joanot Martorell ✉ 07:08, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
- "Independence" is misleading. You and I may know a few things about Valencian history, but the occasional user may have no freaking idea (that is why this is an encyclopaedia: to learn).
- The occasional visitor may find weird that they were "independent" and, at the same time, "a part of" the Crown of Aragon. Because, well, it is weird: you just can not be man and woman at the same time. You can not be independent and, at the same time, partially subjected to a King who also ruled the neighbouring territories.
- Just to mention some examples so that you understand my point: Portugal was independent from the Crown of Aragon, the Republic of Pisa was independent from the Crown of Aragon, the Kingdom of Granada was independent from the Crown of Aragon.... but the Kingdom of Valencia was not. I do not dispute your reasons above but, after all, there was some dependance from the King, as he could go there, call for Corts and get some money, he could also have his Court in Valencia or elsewhere and his military could cross from component kingdom to component kingdome without being considered a "foreign" army by any of those.
- The King of, for example, Portugal couldn't do that, guess why? yes, because the Kingdom of Valencia was independent from Portugal.
- "Independent" is also misleading because it makes you think that it was a stablished kingdom with its own foreign policy, home policies, etc, something which was not. The power was at a local level more than any centralization whatsover, other than the Corts, which were called by the King and were not a sovereign decission. In other words: if there was some independence, that would be within the territory; for example the city of Orihuela did not have any superior authority binding it to the city of Alcoy other than the King himself. There was no remarkable centralized administration whatsoever other than the one implemented by the king who, again, was not only the king of Valencia but of several other territories.
- I am obviously removing the Valencian Country edit you made, once again, at your own risk and only to satisfy your personal POV. I am restoring the official name. This discussion doesn't belong here. It has started already in the relevant place, so please feel free to contribute there. If you don't like Comunitat Valenciana, I'll have no problem with the other official name, Comunidad Valenciana, if that's the one you prefer. Mountolive | Talk 04:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
By the way, Joanot: please feel free to enlarge the Splendour section: I left it a bit sketchy on purpose specially for you, as your name is mentioned there; this way you could also do something other than messing with the names etc. Don't worry if you don't feel too confident with your English: someone else will correct it as they did with mine. Mountolive | Talk 05:29, 8 March 2007 (UTC)