Talk:Basques/Archive 1

"parochial": Do you mean "patrilocal", "patriarchal", or "patrilineal"? -phma

---

This entry is crying out for subheadings: language, culture, history, etc. Wetman 12:16, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

I've reworked this using Wikipedia:WikiProject Ethnic Groups Template. Hope that addresses your concern. -- Jmabel 23:16, 16 Feb 2004 (UTC)

---

I have just reversed a recent anon edit, restoring the statement that the Basques had considerable autonomy in pre-Revolutionary France. Among other sources, I can cite the 1911 E.B., which should be fine on this sort of thing. If someone has sources that disagree, please cite them rather than just changing the article in this respect without explanation. -- Jmabel 22:52, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

I am not sure of the usefulness of the recent anon edit adding "Today, Basque nacionalists claim that Spanish Civil War was a war of Spain against the Basques (which is obviously false: there were basques on both sides)." I am basically going to reword it to be less POV (i.e. drop "obviously"), but let the content basically stand. -- Jmabel 22:57, 19 Feb 2004 (UTC)

blood type

The use of "blood type" is inconsistent with the definitions given in [1]. (I've posted similar comments on Talk:blood type and Talk:Rhesus.) Fpahl 09:45, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

current politics

It would be nice to have more on current politics. Especially, reliable information on referenda/opinion polls concerning autonomy/secession would be good. Fpahl 09:52, 5 Apr 2004 (UTC)

The sad reality is that there are a new law that punishes with 5 years prison any trying of convocatory of any referendum. Idiazabal 19:08, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Not sure what you mean by "trying of convocatory of any referendum". Do you mean "attempt to call a meeting to discuss a referendum? Because certainly it's not illegal to conduct public opinion polls on the matter, look at the Euskobarómetro ([2]). Euskobarómetro probably deserves an article, apparently hasn't got one yet. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:52, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)

Look at the Spanish Penal Code and the law passed by Aznar's government that punishes with high prison pains the convocatory or the helping in any way to conduct such referendum or consultive poll. It is but another of the large list of anti-basque laws that have passed different Spanish government, from the 1983 post militar coup attemp's LOAPA to the last Polictical Parties Law, or the so-called anti-Ibarretxe anti-consultive referendum.

Unfortunately the Euskobarometro is directed by a Spanish schoolar militant of one of the strong anti-basque lobbying groups that Aznar formed to try to produce a regime change in the Basque Autonomous Community. Idiazabal 12:12, 3 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Let me clarify what is unclear: "convocatory" is not an English word. Repeating it does not clarify. Am I correct in guessing you mean "meeting"? Or do you mean something else? And are you claiming that the Euskobarómetro is illegal under Spanish law? Because it seems, in part, to be a survey on precisely the matter that you claim it is illegal to do surveys about.

Frankly, the claim that the Euskobarómetro is the work of an "anti-Basque militant" strikes me as so patently absurd that I don't know what to make of it. It's been around for years. Unless you are going to claim that everything they say is an outright lie (i.e. that they haven't actually done the surveys they report), they seem to get a pretty good number of responses even from supporters of Batasuna. Are you really saying that Basques in general and Batasuna supporters in particular have voluntarily participated over time in the work of an anti-Basque militant? Frankly, Idiazabal, I am beginning to believe that you are so biased yourself as to tag anyone who is not in complete agreement with you as "anti-Basque".

Despite your obvious greater knowledge than mine on certain matters, I am coming to believe that you are in this as a POV warrior, not a person trying to help create an encyclopedia article according to principles of NPOV. Consequently, I can't trust what you say: I believe you bring up facts and citations only when they help your cause, and that you will withhold relevant references with which you are familiar if what they say is inconvenient to you. I hope I'm wrong, and I realize I may be crossing the boundary into an ad hominem attack. However, between this article and fueros, that is now my impression of your work. -- Jmabel | Talk 21:55, Nov 3, 2004 (UTC)

Don't try to confuss me. The question on top says "referenda/opinion polls". Of course opinion polls can be made, but referenda or voting polls are punished with prison for any Basque authority that would organize one. That's a law passed by the Aznar government.

About the Euskobarometro, it is directed by proffesor Francisco LLera, who turned to be a militant of a lobbyist antinationalist group of significance during the ETA truce of 1998 and subsequent 2001 tries to overthrow the Basque government. I don't say his work wasn't credible, but it was himself who ended questioned cause the strong alineation with a cause. I.e. when you see the questions made to the people in his survey, as he knows yet moreless what people think about a concrete issue, if the answer is going to be no favorable to his tesis, then divides the answer in four possible answers, making it appear as reduces porcentages. Anyway, there are more opinion surveys than LLera's.

But this is not the question. The question is that voting polls or referenda about Basque issues are now punished with prison for the elected president of the Basque Autonomous Community, which is by itself a perfect symtom of the illness. Let's ask Mr. LLera why has he milited in an antibasque propaganda group that has helped to stablish such a law, or the also recent Political Parties Law that forbade i.e. Batasuna and has brought the president of the parliament and the speakers of all nationalist parties, and even the Spanish left IU's speaker in the Basque parliament, to be charged in court, in an pathetical attempt to stablish a sort of judges rule in the Basque parliament. Or the punishment with one year prison to a parliamentary for what he said in one of his speeches in the parliament (he said exactly that "ETA has fight for the liberation of this people", which is an assertion true or false, one that can be trust or not, but it is difficult to defend that people answer freely to opinion surveys when even the parliamentaries in the parliament are punished with prison cause their speeches.) Idiazabal 12:13, 4 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Did the Basques arrive with the Indo-Europeans?

I removed the piece about the the Alans' and the Sarmatians' possible Turkish identity as I don't think the article benefits from further hypotheses. Moreover, the Basques were not Turkish, AFAIK. I believe the preceeding part says it all: "During the Germanic migrations that swept Europe after the fall of Rome, for instance, almost all the tribes were Indo-Europeans". It is already remarked that ALL were not I-E, and perhaps the Huns or the Avars could be added instead as the consensus is that they were not I-E. Wiglaf

Basque are the only pre-indoeuropean people in Europe still alive. It´s verified Basque people are living both side of current borders more than 10.000 years. Current basque are the same group of people living there that time. Some people say they can verified basque people are living there last 15000 years. Ikertxo

Thousands of years in the same region

In what kind of research have the Germanic tribes been shown to come from Asia of all places? It sounds like a very original and interesting hypothesis, and I'd like to have some sources that claim this. The ethnogenesis of the "Proto-Germanic people" is generally regarded as having taken place AFTER the Indo-European invasion, and in southern Scandinavia (and in adjoining parts of Germany). Wiglaf

I agree. The only feasible definition of "Germanic" is the sound-changes particular to these languages, i.e. *p > f etc. This must have happened sometime during the 1st millennium BC, and at that time the germans-to-be were almost certainly already in northern Europe.

Anyway, this article abounds with romantic/hollywood-style history. "Germanic migrations" "sweep" the Celts away and "overwhelm" the Roman empire. This is naive. Of course there were battles, and of course there was competition for territory, but while in a hollywood picture, the final battle takes about a quarter of the whole story, in reality such dramatic events are rare and often are but the culmination of a gradual process. By the time of the germanic migrations, the "Celts" were fully romanized, the Roman Empire was collapsing, and there was simply a power vacuum that could be filled by a new breed of aristocracy. I think we should avoid evoking images of barbarian warrior princes arriving from the dark north and slaying druids as they advance. -- Dbachmann 11:10, 11 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I basically agree, too. However, realize that you will be up against quite a Basque mythos if you try to make these changes. I'd strongly suggest (1) keeping material even that you consider legendary, and trying to give attributions for where it comes from and for concrete critiques of it and (2) citing very well on your contrary material. This will almost certainly get contentious, and you'd better make sure your scholarship is solid and that you don't delete material just on the basis of "doesn't sound right to me." Legend has a place in the article, as long as it is marked as such. -- Jmabel 16:53, Aug 11, 2004 (UTC)

I do not intend to remove any material. I was commenting more on the wording than on content. For example, read "replace" or "succeed" for "sweep away" and "overwhelm". Such rewording, while retaining content, will work wonders towards an "encyclopedic feel" of the article's style. Dbachmann 07:09, 12 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Go for it! Please! -- Jmabel 16:18, Aug 12, 2004 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I had a closer look after I put my neck out, and I don't think I can do this article any good. It should be condensed, or split up, and I fear poeple will rip my head off if I undertake such major reworkings. Especially since I'm not a specialist on the subject. Lots of minor quibbles, too: 1.1.1 Did the Basques arrive with the Indo-Europeans? doesn't really strike me as all that relevant to take such a prominent place (Origin of the Basques should just be moved to its own article!). Many forced to learn Spanish during the Franco dictatorship may be true but is screaming POV & would certainly be better off in the main text than in a tabular overview. Etc. -- I think I'll just check back in a couple of months to see how the article is doing. I usually am 'bold' but I'm not the man for this job, sorry... Dbachmann 21:10, 17 Aug 2004 (UTC)

"The first two known invasions the Basques survived were those of the Indo-Europeans and then the Celts" - aren't Celts Indo-Europeans? Or does this passage mean to distinguish the "original" Indo-European invasion of Europe from the later Celtic expansion into Spain? Guettarda 21:41, 27 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Euskara vs Euskera

Well, nire Euskaldunak, I've managed to stumble upon both. Which is correct? Which is official? Or should we just e-mail the Euskaltzaindia? Muhamedmesic 22:17, 3 Jun 2004 (UTC)

The form prefered by Euskaltzaindia is "Euskara". In their dictionary (http://www.euskaltzaindia.net/hiztegibatua/), you can't even find "euskera" . Why? I don't know. Both forms, and a few more, are currently used by basque speakers. (14 Jul 2004)

Basque history removed from Basque Country

Until the French Revolution (and, to some extent, beyond that in Spain), Euskal Herria retained its fueros -- separate laws, taxes and law courts -- respected by both French and Spanish monarchs. With the fall of the ancien régime, the fueros were completely abolished in France, which came under a central government that abolished all local privileges. In Spain, with some irony, through the various civil wars of the Nineteenth Century the fueros were upheld by the nominally absolutist Carlists and opposed by the victorious constitutional forces. Thus the same wars that brought relative liberty to most of Spain abolished most of the traditional liberties of the Basques.

However, the Spanish provinces remained with the widest autonomy in Peninsular Spain.

After the Spanish Civil War, the regime of General Franco considered Biscay and Gipuzkoa as "traitor provinces" abolishing the remains of their autonomy, but Navarre and Alava maintained small local police forces and some tax self-government.

-- Error 02:44, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I've now done my best to integrate this material into the present article. It didn't go entirely easily (it threads through a number of paragraphs). People may want to look at the article as it now stands. -- Jmabel 05:24, Jun 5, 2004 (UTC)

Non-Indo-European languages

According to the articles about the Saami, the Saami language is not an Indo-European language and may have not been in Europe resulting from an invasion from Asia. This point have to be changed here.

vasconnes ?

is it really English ? sounds like Spanish to me, what about "Vascons" ?

It's French. -- Jmabel 19:40, Sep 4, 2004 (UTC)

I thought it was Latin, but then it should probably be Vascones. Strabo's Greek has Ouaskones.

Well, the English is Vascons and that's where our article is, so that's what I've changed the link to, since whoever wrote that article presumably gave the matter some thought. I believe the Latin singular is Vascon and plural Vasconi, but I wouldn't bet on it. -- Jmabel 06:53, Sep 5, 2004 (UTC)

Sorry. Basques, yes; Gascons, yes, but "Vascons" in English? Where does that come from? Incidentally, the Latin is Vasco singular and Vascones plural.

And what is this "Vasconne Cohort"? There is no cohort of that name in the records. It looks like the I fida Vardullorum equitata, a cohors milliaria attested at Castlecary under Antoninus Pius, at Corbridge and Lanchester under Marcus Aurelius, and High Rochester in the third century [Breeze and Dobson, Hadrian's Wall, Penguin, Harmondsworth 1987 p 252]. But are we sure the Vardulli were Basques? The "origins" section of this article suggests doubt. Mark O'Sullivan 10:29, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

• I don't have much stake in this (other than that if we are using it at all it should be Vascon, not Vasconne or some such). -- Jmabel | Talk 02:49, July 22, 2005 (UTC)

• I've looked at Strabo now, and all he says is that the Ouascones live between the Cantabrians and the Pyrenees. And his survey is clearly high-level and doesn't mention all the tribes involved. 09:05, 8 August 2005 (UTC)

-I´d like to point one thing about this, it´s not the same Basque than Vascon, Basque is a person from the Basque Country, and Vascon was a person from the Vascones tribe in the times of romans, which, according to what it is said in the article, wasn´t originally located in the actual soil of the Basque Country, so, it is not true that every Basque one is a Vascon.

berber language ? really ?

Hi Jmabel

I am the one who proposed "Vascons" , thanks for changing, I wasn't sure as I am not a native English Speaker.

About the "genetic" part :

I don't like to see results of modern and scientific publications related to Sabino Arana's "work". Sabino was the initiator of Basque nationalism and is still a hero and for all the nation, especially in the Spanish Basque Country, but his theories about genetics and Basque superiority are just racist crap.

What I am sure about is that there is no more prouved link between the Berber and the Basque language, this is just a theory more... Basque has already been linked to any possible language whith such theories. ( but if can quote a publication ... no problem )

Let me quote "feu" Larry Trask :

"People have tried to connect Basque with Berber, Egyptian, and other African languages, with Iberian, Pictish, Etruscan, Minoan, Sumerian, the Finno-Ugric languages, the Caucasian languages, the Semitic languages, with Burushaski (another language with no known relatives, spoken in the Himalayas) -- in fact, with almost all the languages of Africa and Asia, living and dead, and even with languages of the Pacific and of North America. Nothing. Nada. Zero. Basque absolutely cannot be shown to be related to any other language at all. Some people will try to tell you differently, but, not to mince words, they don't know what they're talking about, and the great majority of them don't even know anything about Basque. "

agur.

-> I would let "linguistic studies have linked the Basque population and language with Northern Africa's Berber stock" which is true, such studies exist.

-> I would cut "there are also claims of linguistic evidence to this effect..." which is false. (--unsigned)

• For what it's worth, you address your remark to me, but the passages alluded to are not mine. I, too, seriously doubt any connection of Basque and Berber, but have never read much on the topic. Sounds like you know a bit about this, so why don't you edit? However rather than simply delete, I suggest you digest what's there down to a sentence or two and then add a piece of the quote above (with citation) to refute it. -- Jmabel 17:43, Sep 5, 2004 (UTC)

That theory was refused long time ago. Ikertxo

dubious edits

Once again today, a bunch of rather dubious (and in some cases only borderline comprehensible) edits. I can't tell if they add up to improvements or the opposite. Can someone who knows this material weigh in? I suspect some should be kept and some not. -- Jmabel | Talk 01:59, Oct 18, 2004 (UTC)

Sorry, Jmabel, I believe I was who made the last changes you are refering to. I supressed that reference to "Spanish propaganda", although I would like to reword it in a proper way. We can't forget the long Spanish antibasque propaganda dated away long to the XVIII ends and reaffirmed from Godoy to our days.

Idiazabal 11:53, 22 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Again, I'd like to see this taken up by someone more competent than I. And some of it is made tricky by the fact that in a few places I may not be correctly undestanding your English. To take up a couple of examples:

1. you added, "which has probed totally false." I presume that's "...proved...". As far as I can see, this is just bold assertion with no evidence. If there is solid, generally accepted evidence that the claim is totally false, cite it here, and then we should remove the passage entirely; there's no use in saying "X put forward a theory but it's false" unless we want a separate section about refuted theories.
2. "Convined genetic and linguistic studies have shown that Basques have retained, in addition to their language, believed to be descended from an original language spoken in Europe, some of their original genetic characteristics." I'm guessing that "Convined" is meant to be "combined"? What on earth does "an original language spoken in Europe"? All languages are in some sense "original", all European languages are "spoken in Europe".

I guess Idiazabal points to the theories of Basque being the last remain of a family of pre-Indoeuropean languages covering Europe. -- Error 02:32, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Again, I don't personally want to get involved in weighing the evidence in an area where I have no expertise, but some of what you've written just doesn't make much sense to me. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:44, Oct 22, 2004 (UTC)

To this end, I've requested peer review. -- Jmabel | Talk 18:53, Oct 22, 2004 (UTC)

As far as I know, Cavalli-Sforza's genetic research has both detractors and supporters. Somebody knowledgeable about genetics should state the current, erm, state in a NPOV way. -- Error 02:32, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

I'm going to stick a POV Check notice on this article. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:15, Oct 23, 2004 (UTC)

The A new Spanish propaganda-paragraph is so obviously agenda-encumbered that it should be removed without replacement, until someone comes up with a more neutral writeup. Sometimes it is much preferable that people with no expertise but with the capacity for research write an article, than people with an agenda, even if they are experts. "propaganda" and "totally false" is just not acceptable in this context. dab 08:15, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)

What was inadmisible was the way it was writen previously. It seemed just the garbage I use to read writen about the Basques by neighboring people with their own agenda.

About genetics, there are also the same agendas, and not precissely Basque, to try to pinpoint the Basques as racist. And it is curious how you pretend write such theories while denying Cavalli-Sforza's.

Anyway I've found some references about Basques in the XVIII made by John Adams. And sure there will be a lot made by Humbolt. But it is possible you prefer throw away these and put there the typical Spanish basque-bashing to which we are so accustomed. Idiazabal 18:48, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Whoa, easy. I don't know what you mean by your allusion to Cavalli-Sforza. I know that a lot of rubbish is written about basque origins, both by basques and by non-basques. I have no agenda myself, and the basques can grow on trees or be descended from Atlantis for all I care. I was commenting on the style of the paragraph in question, which sets off all sorts of bias-alarms. The content may or may not be acceptable, the style is not. dab 19:46, 24 Oct 2004 (UTC)

Cut paragraph

Given that my concerns about POV have not been answered, and that the paragraph does not seem so central to the article that it must be there, I have cut it and moved it here to the talk page:

A new Spanish propaganda recently has tried to link the Basque population and language with Northern Africa's Berber stock; they have even tried to claim linguistic evidence to this effect (see the section on language) which has proved totally false. Recent evidence[3] [4] shows the y chromosomes of Basques, Western Irish and Welsh are very similar. Convined genetic and linguistic studies have shown that Basques have retained, in addition to their language, believed to be descended from an original language spoken in Europe, some of their original genetic characteristics. [5]

If someone can sort this out in terms of who actually says what, and what their credentials are, fine, then it belongs back in the article. Again, I have no idea what are the facts of the matter, but this is written like a tract, not an encyclopedia article. -- Jmabel | Talk 04:15, Oct 25, 2004 (UTC)

Well, I made the last changes. But I put a link to Cavalli-Sforza workings, even taking it from there and changing it a little bit. But there are lots of articles about the issue, most of them from the international scientist community. And of course I've plenty links.

Just today I've found a new one [[6]] about a new discovered gene that has been given a Basque name cause its discovering has been made thanks to the study on four Basque families and a fifth non-basque. Sure it can be found also in some scientific publication.

And about the Spanish propaganda, yes, perhapps it needs its proper space, but it is hard to understand the Basque case without some mention and history to the long campaign of anti-basque or basque-bashing propaganda. Which could be seen also in some parts of this Wikipedia article also. Although in a general viow it is great, there were some little references to suppossed "racism" or that on Ancient history, Romans and Celt neighbourghs that had such sense.

Idiazabal 11:43, 25 Oct 2004 (UTC)