Show Navigation
Conversation
Notices
-
"We are not radicals. We are normal Spaniards who want our country to remain united. We love Catalonia; my wife and mother are Catalan. But Catalonia is not like Scotland, a country that joined a union. Catalonia has always been Spain." d-do they not teach history in spain? Like at all?
-
For the unaware: The modern spanish state has origins in the *dynastic union* between the mostly-catalan Kingdom of Aragón and the Kingdom of Castile. The Kingdom of Aragón remained under a dynastic union until the 1700's.
-
@tekk Always = before 2000.
-
@clacke @tekk Arguably allways = 1479. But I'm no historian either.
-
@auroch 1479 was the dynastic union, Aragón was still officially its own country, it just happened to share a monarch with Castile. Just like Spain didn't cease to exist just because Charles V was both the emperor of Spain and of the Holy Roman Empire (even though it is sometimes useful to abstract and say "The Lands of the Habsburg Crown" to capture the senses in which they were united.)
-
@tekk Yes, you are right, and is a nice way to see it. But a state is really a political union, and the dynastic union implies that. Other territories have "come and go" but Iberian Aragon Crown territories (my home town falls within those territories, and catalan is my mother tongue) have been toguether with the rest of Spain for over 500 years.
How that translates into aquired rights or nationalities, or how it conditions rights and future agreements is another issue.
-
@auroch Agreed. I'd say that the decrees are a reasonable marker because those represent the death of the Aragonese political system despite the fact that it had been presenting a unified foreign policy before. We could probably argue if we wanted that the death of catalonia was when the various catalonian bits were assumed into the aragoese crown, but I'm pretty sure the aragonese crown was linguistically and culturally catalan? Not 100% though.
-
@tekk Mmm... I am not sure, there is a romance language called Aragonés that is almost lost and spoken in the north of Aragon, but the traditional language boundaries do not match completely the current political subdivisions. Catalan, for instance, is partially spoken in some Aragonese towns near the border with Catalonia. There is also occitan, that is spoken in the Vall D'arán (I think is quite related to Aragonés). Also, in many areas of the Valencia autonomous region Catalan was never spoken (Especially the interior of Valencia province and the south of Alicante province).
-
@auroch @tekk
> 1479 January 20 – Ferdinand II ascends the throne of Aragon, and rules together with his wife Isabella I, Queen of Castile, over most of the Iberian peninsula.
> It was not until the constitution of 1876 that the singular form of the name, "España" (Spain), became the official name of the Spanish state.
So I guess in a way, one could say that "Spain" has always included Catalonia.
-
@tekk @auroch I can't see in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Spain any specific point where Spain became a unified state rather than a personal union. It seems that it was considered one country for the purposes of the War of Succession?
-
@clacke The wikipedia entry for the Kingdom of Aragón (https://social.tekk.in/url/30008) points to the Nueva Planta decrees in the early 1700's as the death of an independent state and the formation of a unified spanish kingdom.
-
@tekk
> in the aftermath of the War of the Spanish Succession
Oh! I wasn't too far off then, except I was completely wrong about the war being about an existing unified crown. :-)
-
@clacke @tekk It is tricky because both crowns maintained their government structures and tradtions, but they acted internationally as a single state. Also, that doesn't mean that there were not laws enforced in all the territory, the infamous expulsion of Jews and moors, as well as the spanish inquisiton was enforced in both Castille and Aragon.
Spanish people generally consider Isabel and Ferdinand as the first rulers of a united Spain.
-
@auroch @tekk @clacke >I'm no historian either
No prob. That's not required to make bold statements about it, as you may have seen these days.