Talk:El Cid/Archive 1


 * Current discussion page is on Talk:El_Cid.

El Cid or the Cid?
this could be fake

The article constantly switches between 'El Cid' and 'the Cid'. In English, 'the Cid' was standard until the entertaining but absurd Charlton Heston epic, and I think I am writing in saying it is still the form preferred those that prefer not to get their history from Hollywood (not NPOV, I know), so any chance of changing the title and using 'the Cid' throughout? Obviously 'El Cid' would redirect to it. (Apologies if I've broken any Wikepedia rules or protocols, I haven't done this before.) John Bryant


 * A Winner of the August 2004 West Dakota Prize

This entry has won the West Dakota Prize for successfully employing the expression "legend states''" in a complete sentence. --

WP:MILHIST Assessment
Another nice, long, detailed article. Pictures, lots of good sectioning. Could use some expansion on the legend and the appearances in fiction, though. After all, this is where the vast majority of people know El Cid from, no? LordAmeth 05:06, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Beard
One personal feature very stressed in Mío Cid is his beard. One of his epithetes is el de la barba florida. I don't know if that's a personal thing or typical of knights. Incidentally in El Cid (movie), Heston is shaven most of the time. I don't know how to integrate this into the article. --Error 00:29, 15 Jun 2005 (UTC)

Early Life
Can anyone clarify the following sentence?

He had in 1067, fought with Sancho against the Moorish stronghold of Zaragosa (Saragossa), making Zaragoza's Emir al-Muqtadir, a trusted official under Sancho. Who fought ... against whom ... who was the official ... (I doubt it was al-Muqtadir -- which links to the Caliph of Baghdad of the same name, having nothing to do with Zaragosa at all!) --Ddddan 19:54, 27 July 2005 (UTC)


 * Clearer now? --Error 23:48, 27 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, I changed "along" to "alongside". Thanks -- Ddddan 18:19, 29 July 2005 (UTC)

Medieval Castilian
I wonder how can you know how medieval Castilian was pronounced. Do you have any recordings? :P --86.139.51.169 03:12, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

like this kinda: cast(as in the broken arm)-ill-E.-in get it now? dejuismaster

Information at Campeador
There has been a merge tag on Campeador for a long time (nearly a year) proposing a merge to this page. Could anyone comment on the merge, or more generally on the correctness of Campeador as it doesn't sound totally convincing to me. Kcordina Talk 14:37, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

its true as far as i know. it needs merging.

I looked at the rules and stuff, its almost the same article, it really should be merged.


 * Merge done. Kcordina Talk 09:53, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks!

I think it should be merged, and have the Campeador redirect to that section of the El Cid part of the article. Also, remove the stubs when you merge them please, since its posted above that it's been there for a year.

Ihafez

Sid Fernandez
Would it be superfluous to add to the article the fact that Sid Fernandez, a former pitcher for the New York Mets baseball team in the 1980s, was regularly referred to in the New York newspapers as El Sid? Misterdoe 18:32, 25 October 2006 (UTC)

Would do you reckon?
I like to add an external link to the 14th century codex that is preserved in the Spanish National Library Online view and short description of this codex is made available via The European Library. Fleurstigter 14:08, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Today I added it as reference. Greetings, Fleurstigter 10:07, 5 April 2007 (UTC)

Medieval 2?
In Medieval 2 Total War, one of the rebel castles is occupied by El Cid The Chivalrous. Should I add this in? Duncan Frost 13:36, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

No. Pretty trivial reference, and then you'd have to go add M2TW references to every other historical figure that appears in the game (good luck figuring out which Vsevolod is the correct one), which would just be lame and irritate people. It is a sweet game, though. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.208.120.38 (talk) 12:23, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

death
El Cid was killed by an infected arrow wound. I'm prety sure it came from an african crossbow.a kid in calgary.

Let us not confuse reality with a Charlton Heston movie. There is no evidence that the Cid died as a result of injury of any kind.--Anthony.bradbury"talk" 23:40, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to point out that as of Jan 18 2008 the article contains contradictory information about the above, stating both that he "died from a stray arrow" and that he "died peacefully". I won't edit the article since I have no idea which one is correct. -anon

I'm not entirely sure why, but if anyone wants to fix it. It says at one point that El cid died of noncombative wounds, but at the end it says he died in combat, which was it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 167.93.38.23 (talk) 16:51, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I have a book from the 60s ("El Cíd - Soldier and Hero"; look it up) translated from Italian that states he died of an arbalest (type of crossbow) wound. 78.16.184.185 (talk) 21:31, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

I have a translated version of the Historia Roderici (the earliest known biography of El Cid) that claims that El Cid died in peacefully in July 1099 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.48.244.57 (talk) 23:12, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

birth date
Just curious about the birth date -1044 or 1040? The article seems to be unsure about it to the extent that the summary says the former, while the "early life" section says 1040.

The Cid's sword
I was reading this article and I saw a photograph where indicates that the pictured sword is the cid's sword. Well, as Spaniard and arms and history lover, I have to tell that the sword of the photograph is the Sword of the King Fernando III El Santo, who lived over two hundred years after the Cid.

By the way, that magnific sword can be visited in the Armoury of the Royal Palace of Madrid.


 * Not in any way arguing, just asking; could not the sword used by the Cid, who was in close contact with the Castilian Royal Family, have ultimately come into the possession of King Fernando III? --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 19:22, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi Anthony, that's not possible because, although the real Cid's sword could have been in possession of the Castilian Royal Family, that sword would be very different from the Fernando III's sword, which corresponds clearly with a XIII century sword,( like the oakeshott's XIV typology, whith a longer blade). Also, that Fernando III's sword has a gothic guard. All that reasons make that sword could not be previous to XIII century.

On the other hand, the most sure thing is that El Cid carried a typical Norman sword, (X, Xa, XI, XIa typologies in Oakeshott's classification), because that was the most common sword in the christian Europe during the XI century.

By the way, there are in Spain two swords that traditionaly people have associated with Tizona (in the Military Museum of Madrid) and Colada (Royal Armoury), the famous two swords of the Cid. At present, we know that these swords belong to the XV and XVI centuries respectively.

I hope I' have answered your question. Bye. Rafael

PD: Sorry my english... k

In the introductory section, there is a note that the pronunciation of "Cid" in modern Spanish varies "depending on the dialect." Technically, there are no dialects of Spanish. The Real Academia monitors the Spanish language and determines what is or is not included in modern Spanish. There are many languages very similar to Spanish, from Portugese to Catalan, Valencian variants, gallego, etc., but these are properly parallel developments from Latin, since Spanish, and all Romance languages, are derived from Latin. I suggest that the reference to "dialects" of Spanish be deleted.Cd195 19:58, 27 August 2007 (UTC)


 * You are confussing Spanish dialects with Spanish (Iberian) languages. Catalan, Galician, etc, are separate languages. Yet Spanish (or Castilian) has dozens of dialects like Central Castilian, Andalusian, Murcian, Canarian, Cuban, Puerto Rican, North Mexican, Central Mexican, Chiapanec, Colombian... etc, etc, etc... The usual for a language with 300 million speakers in 5 continents. What the title says is that in some dialects ("Standard Castilian", for example) El Cid it is pronounced as "El Thid" and in others (Andalusian, Canarian, Latinoamerican dialects) it is "El Sid".--Menah the Great 21:27, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Babieca, El Cid's war-horse
The part about how El Cid's horse was named seems to be repeated with different wording... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.179.99.240 (talk) 13:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

his arabic name
how to spell his name and title in arabic?210.235.223.106 (talk) 17:53, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Excuse me, I am most certainly NOT confusing "Iberian Languages" with "dialects." As a Spaniard, and native Spanish speaker, who was born and raised in Puerto Rico, I believe I know what I am talking about. Spanish spoken in Puerto Rico, for example, is not a "dialect" of Spanish (Jeez!). A document written in Spanish in Puerto Rico is indistinguishable from the same document written in Spain. There are differences in pronounciation, such as the lisping "s" sound one hears in Spain, (a trivial variant, often considered "cute" in Latin America), and it doesn't define a dialect any more than you can speak of a Boston "dialect" or a southern Alabama "dialect." Any Spanish spoken in Latin America, South America or Spain IS THE SAME language. Regional slang, pronounciation of certain sounds, syllabic emphasis, etc., may indeed vary greatly, but these differences are minor; people from any Spanish-speaking country can understand each other, can understand people from Spain, and produce identical written language regardless of their origin, just like British and American English have tremedous variations in regional slang, idiomatic phrases, and pronounciation, but they are not "dialects." I have travelled in Spain, in numerous Spanish speaking countries in the Western Hemishpere, as well as throughout the United States (where I now reside) and England, and I know a dialect when I hear one! This pernicious misapprehension of the nature of the Spanish language is one of the most persistent urban myths in the United States. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cd195 (talk • contribs) 06:20, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

You're a bit confused about the term "dialect." The differences in language you're refering to DO constitute dialects. "A dialect (from the Greek word διάλεκτος, dialektos) is a variety of a language characteristic of a particular group of the language's speakers. The term is applied most often to regional speech patterns, but a dialect may also be defined by other factors, such as social class[...]"dialect" may simply be used to refer to subtle regional variations in linguistic practices that are considered mutually intelligible." Thus, an English speaker in Boston speaks a different dialect of English from one Alabama. Same LANGUAGE (and written identically, since writing is formal and standardized), but a different dialect. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.208.120.38 (talk) 12:37, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

You're in the wrong section. Argue about dialects halfway up the page. 78.16.184.185 (talk) 21:33, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

More on dialect
No, I am not confused about dialects. I think the difficulty we are having in agreeing on this issue is the vague definition of the word "dialect." A straightforward definition of the word is simply a variation in a language that shows differences in phonology, grammar, and vocabulary from the standard form of the language. However, interpretation of that definition is more problematic. I don't believe regional slang, as one may hear in various areas of the United States, fulfills criteria for a distinct dialect. Phonology variations can be subtle, such as the change in rhythm and inflection from Southern drawl to Boston accent, but I don't think any reasonable person would classify those manners of speech as English dialects, despite their distinctive sounds. Grammar certainly is invariant in those two modes of speech, and any grammatical idiosyncracies, especially in the Southern variant, are clearly considered incorrect speech. Educated people in the South may sound distinctive, but their diction and grammar is correct, and indistinguishable from the Northern variant.

I feel that an unofficial but tacitly understood criterion for the definition of dialect is the degree of difficulty in communication between speakers of the standard form and the dialect speakers. In "true" dialect, the intelligibility gulf is quite broad, and except for a few words here and there, speakers of different dialects may have great difficulty understanding one another, more because of grammatic and vocabulary issues than strict phonology. While in Scotland last year, I was impressed with my difficulty understanding the spoken English of some highland people, although they were speaking perfectly appropriate standard English, both grammatically and in terms of vocabulary. I couldn't really say they were speaking a dialect, despite our communication difficulties.

In Spanish in particular, only the standard form of the language, which is monitored by the Real Academia Espanola, can be properly considered Spanish. As such there are no dialects of Spanish. Other languages are spoken in countries where Spanish is the predominant language, even in Spain, where you can hear everything from Valencian to Catalan to Basque. But languages such as the former two are properly parallel evolutions from the Latin, not corruptions or dialects of Spanish, and of course Basque is a weirdo tongue which came from the planet Ork. (Makes as much sense as any theory of where Basque came from. It's certainly not and Indo-European tongue.)

I must strongly state again, I don't know what books you are reading, or whose "authority" you are bowing to, as a native Spanish speaker, I ASSURE YOU, I can converse with ANY person from ANY Spanish speaking country in Latin America, South America, or Spain. There is NO difference in our written language, only very slight variations in phonology which do not affect comprehension, and slight differences in vocabulary. I cannot stress this enough. "Puerto Rican" is not different from "Cuban" or any other Spanish spoken in other countries. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.203.167.60 (talk) 15:36, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

O'Callaghan
At one point under "Exile" this article has a quote from the writings of O'Callaghan. Who is that? I need at least a first name because O'Callaghan is a fairly common last name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.199.199.99 (talk) 23:22, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

Descent
How is El Cid the ancestor of each and every monarchy in Europe? (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 10:07, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Read the article AGAIN. CAREFULLY.--Kim Kusanagi (talk) 16:12, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Conlicting accounts of origin of the Campeador title
Earlier on the page it says he was given this title for defeating a knight in one on one battle, meaning champion, but then later it's suggested that the designation is a vulgar latin term of discernible origin. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.186.212.45 (talk) 18:55, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Charlton Heston's movie ending was not exactly made up.
Greetings, people.

I was reading the article and it basically says that the director/ script called for the ending where Mío Cid wins his final battle after his death. This is not entirely true.

Actually, this is based on an legend that says that, while en route to his exile, Mío Cid stopped to help an old pilgrim who was starving to death. Then, this old man revealed himself to be Saint Peter, who then granted Mío Cid the gift of winning his last battle after he eventually passed away. Then the events of the movie occur, years later.

You could try to googlesearch for it, even though I don't think it will come to the surface, since it's rather obscure info (it might even be a legend made by my ancestors, who are partly descended from him). Thanks for reading.--Kim Kusanagi (talk) 16:18, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

Verifiability problems, idolizing tone of the article
Lack of inline citations is one problem. Another one is a tendency to idolize which is inappropriate for encyclopedia. Dipa1965 (talk) 16:29, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree with you on the idolisation point. Gwame (talk) 15:49, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I think you must write more about El Cid's wars to Count Berenguer of Barcelona, while he was serving Motamid, and not only for the wars to Yusuf and his Black Guard forces.--BubbleBabis (talk) 07:53, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

Amazing Adult
"By this time, the Cid was an amazing adult."

Does that part need to be there in the article? Gwame (talk) 15:49, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

The first sentence of the article isn't quite comprehensible (what did he do after being exiled); also, people aren't usually "conquered" or "governed." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.227.20.237 (talk) 16:26, 3 August 2008 (UTC)