Talk:Spania

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:

WikiProject Spain (Rated Start-Class) Spain Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome     (Rated Start-Class) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome. To participate, improve this article or visit the project page for more information. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the assessment scale. Mid This article is on a subject of Mid-importance within classical antiquity. WikiProject Middle Ages (Rated Start-Class) Middle Ages Portal Spania is part of WikiProject Middle Ages, a project for the community of Wikipedians who are interested in the Middle Ages. For more information, see the project page and the newest articles. Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale. Article Grading: The article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need. WikiProject Middle Ages To do: Former countries WikiProject    (Rated Start-Class) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former Countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of now-defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project. Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. (FAQ). Add comments Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

[edit] Name

What was the name of this Byzantine province in Latin? FilipeS 20:56, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Spania was the Latin term. The Romans would have called it (the whole peninsula) Hispania, but by the late sixth century, the normal usage had degenerated to simply Spania (for the whole peninsula, see Fredegar). It was the official term used by the Byzantines for the province, however, as seen in the title of its governors: magister militum Spaniae. The language of the province was Latin from top to bottom. Srnec 04:41, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Was there a Greek version of the name, given that the Byzantines spoke Greek? The Ogre 12:53, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I was wondering whether Spania might be the Greek name, or a loanword from Greek. Did they never write Hispania? FilipeS 20:09, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

In Greek, it was (and still is) "Ἱσπανία", pronounced at that time "[H]Ispanía". "Spania" is vulgarized Latin, and would be, as noted, the term actually used both in the province itself and the imperial chancery, since for the duration of the province's existence, the official administrative language of the Empire was Latin. Cplakidas 20:51, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

You mean in the West? Surely not in the East, by the 6th century!

Anyway, I'm surprised that they would use popular Latin so early into the Middle Ages. Most of the time, early medieval writers would try to emulate classical Latin. See Medieval Latin. FilipeS 20:59, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Greek wasn't the official language of the Eastern Empire until the 7th century. And vulgar Latin is not really related to medieval Latin at all - you're right, medieval writers would try to emulate classical Latin, but not really this early, when they didn't yet distinguish between the classical and popular forms (they weren't speaking Latin but they didn't know it yet!). And the spoken language (which evolved into the Romance languages) was always different, even in the classical period. Adam Bishop 01:06, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

I have often heard that claim that the spoken language of the Romans was radically different from the written language from the start, but never seen any convincing evidence. In any case, this is beside the point.

You say that Greek only became the official language of the Empire in the 7th century. However, already in the 6th century Justinian (who was by birth a Latin speaker) used Greek in some of his legislation, did he not? As far as I know, the move towards Greek in official documents in the East started already in the 5th century.

I guess what I'm asking is whether this form Spania is consistently attested in Latin documents throughout this period, or whether it shows up mostly in Greek translations. FilipeS 16:35, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

The Latin Wiki basically explains it. The official usage was Latin, but Byzantine Latin of the 6th century used Spania, not Hispania. I am not yet aware of this term in Greek. Srnec 04:33, 4 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Inconsistencies

In 550, in the reign of Agila, Spain was suddenly troubled by two major revolts. The citizens of Córdoba rebelled against Gothic or Arian rule and Agila was roundly defeated, his son killed, and his treasure lost.

What "treasure" is this?

Their landing at Cartagena was violent. The native Catholic population, which included the family of Leander of Seville, was well disposed to the Visigoth Athanagild and the Byzantine government of the city was forced suppress their freedoms, an oppression which lasted decades into their occupation.

Wasn't Athanagild an ally of the Byzantines? Why would the population, which was "well disposed" to him, be a problem?

In late March 555, the supporters of Agila turned on him, assassinated him, and raised Agila as sole king of the Goths in opposition to the Byzantines, who now posed a threat to the kingdom.

This can't be right! FilipeS 21:50, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

The treasure referred to was the royal treasure, the treasury so to speak. Athanagild was not an ally after the assassination of Agila. The inconsistency in naming has been fixed. Srnec 03:45, 23 July 2007 (UTC)