Talk:Spata family

Hammond
,as I said ,Hammond sauy : "In 1358, Albanians overran Epirus, Acarnania and Aetolia, and established two principalities under their leaders, John Spata and Peter Losha".So the word "Vlach" will be deleted.Rolandi+ (talk) 15:13, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Don't be ignorant. I presented Hammond at Malakasi, --Z oupan 15:47, 25 July 2015 (UTC)



Vlachs should not be deleted. If the migration included Albanians and Vlachs, this should be explained, as is done by Hammond, instead of using Albanians which refers to people (collectively) from Albania.--Z oupan 15:47, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Do you think that I am ignorant?OK. Anyways,Hammond says "Albanians" and it will be "Albanians".As for the fact that some Vlachs were called "Albanians",it is explained at the article.The used reference says "Albanians" so it will be "Albanians".Rolandi+ (talk) 15:56, 25 July 2015 (UTC)


 * That is simple WP:POV and will not help your defence at the notice board. Hammond (secondary) explains that Cantacuzenus (primary) used "Albanians" for both Albanians and Vlachs who migrated from Albania into Greece. Read Cherrypicking.--Z oupan 16:13, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Give me the page which you are referring about.However,the fact that Vlachs were called "Albanians" by Cantacuzenus doesn't mean that Hammond using the word "Albanians" means Albanians and Vlachs.Firstly,give me the page.Rolandi+ (talk) 16:18, 25 July 2015 (UTC)

Hammond says that "In 1358 the Albanians overran Epirus, Acarnania and Aetolia, and established two principalities under their leaders, John Spatas (shpate in Albanian meaning a sword) and Peter Leosas (/fos in Albanian meaning a pockmark)".Why doesn't he says "Albanians and Vlachs"?When Hammond cites Cantacuzenis about Vlachs,he clearly says "Vlachs" and not "Albanians".You are saying that saying "Vlach" (Hammond's transcription of Cantacuzenus) Hammond means Vlachs,while saying "Albanian" he means Albanians and Vlachs together.Interesting!Rolandi+ (talk) 08:57, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Etymology
The word spata is not of Albanian origin, but Greek. See Spatha.--Z oupan 07:27, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Yes it's true.Spata was an Albanian noble family so its name comes from the albanian word "spate".This Albanian word comes from the Latin word spatha which derives from Greek σπάθη (spáthē).Spata (the surname of the family) means "sword" while "Spatha/ē" is only a type of sword.Rolandi+ (talk) 12:12, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Origin
I don't know why someone has used Hammond as a reference hare.He mentions only Buia and Losha.He says that Bua was Aromanian.We are talking about Spata here,not Bua.Rolandi+ (talk) 11:55, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Hammond says "...John Spatas (shpate in Albanian meaning a sword)..." that seems enough to support the claim.  All the best: Rich Farmbrough, 13:51, 18 August 2015 (UTC).

Wrong Coat of arms used
The coat of arms found is of the Sicilian Spadafora family, not of the Shpata. The coat of arms used by the Shpata was a hand holding multiple serpents, as is shown in the Condottiero Mercurio Bua's coat of arms. 185.200.212.102 (talk) 09:11, 2 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Fixed, although it was already reverted once to the Spadafora COA. Please, to anyone looking to reinstate the previous image read your own source carefully. The name given to the COA is "SPATA FORA" or an alternative version of Spadafora, who were a Sicilian noble family. This can be proven by a quick google search of the Spadafora name. Alternatively, you can also see the exact page of the Heraldic book the previous COA was on in this pinterest link, in which it is shown as belonging to the Spatafora. (https://www.pinterest.com/pin/391109548859271276/) FlorianShpata (talk) 17:59, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Also, on Italian Wikipedia: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spadafora_(famiglia) FlorianShpata (talk) 18:04, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Right. Because no branches of Albanian nobility have ever existed in Italy before. Kj1595 (talk) 16:43, 9 March 2024 (UTC)

Pointless edit warring, attempting to reach a consensus.
@Kj1595

If my coat of arms is "fictional", yours is plain wrong, it belongs to an entirely different noble family and you keep reverting it simply because of one thing you misread. Please read the topic above for more info. I don't want to have to edit war, and I much rather have no coat of arms than you put an entirely different one there. Thank you. FlorianShpata (talk) 09:40, 9 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Uh, you included as the supposed coat of arms of the Spata, a part of the image found in Mercurio Bua's armorial. Please explain the logic? Here are two sources which refer to the Spatafora as Albanian: source 1, source 2. Kj1595 (talk) 16:11, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Albanian or not, the Spata and Spatafora are not one and the same, so I really do not get your point here as I didn't comment much on the Spatafora. Although thank you for your cooperation as it seems you didn't add the Spatafora emblem back. FlorianShpata (talk) 16:21, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
 * How can they not be the same when they ruled the same region, Acarnania? As evidenced by Marmora, one of the most attributed and reputable historians of Antiquity... Kj1595 (talk) 16:29, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The first certified member of the Spatafora was Giovanni Spadafora, who in 1230 A.D was secretary to Frederick II, Emperor and king of Sicily. This was long before the first Spata, Pietro Bua Spata, who was lord of Angelokastro and Delvina was ever mentioned. They did have fiefdoms on the Ionian coast, but insisting they are one and the same is pure speculation. The possibility of the Spata being a branch of the Spatafora, is also impossible, considering the fact that the Spata most likely came from Delvina, and only later acquired Acarnania as a fiefdom. There is a consistency of figures in the genealogy of the Spatafora, such as Matteo Spatafora, senator in Missina in 1358 A.D. For a branch of them to pop up in historical record, suddenly, out of nowhere is extremely unlikely, given the fact that they weren't even from Acarnania anyway.
 * As for the Spatafora being a branch of the spata in Itlay like you said earlier, no. The spatafora are documented before the Spata, and thus this theory would not make sense either. FlorianShpata (talk) 20:16, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The first "certified"... you had to put that word in there, didn't you? Certified by whom? Mugnos is the only source. Do you have secondary sources that don't cite Mugnos?
 * Even in the wiki article regarding the Spata family, there is no mention when this family was established. Important individuals are thrown in there but no true lineage has been established within the article itself. You argue in absoluteness and hypotheticals. Two words which contradict each other... "the possibility is impossible since most likely they came". So how can it be "impossible" when you aren't sure, definitively, where they came from?
 * A branch of the family didn't suddenly pop up. It was there, not researched well enough. Did you know the Scura had a noble branch in Dalmatia? And that the Gropa served as stratiotis under Veneto? You probably didn't. But how can I be sure? I am throwing hypotheticals, now. Bad example. Kj1595 (talk) 01:29, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Numbers aside, what is the likelyhood that two families of Antiquity, inhabiting a proximate region of the world, sharing the exact same name, have no correlation between them? Marmora refers to the Spata as Spatafora in the 1600s. This isn't recent bibliography. There have been instances where other families, Albanian even, have fictitously borrowed the name of foreign nobility such as the Angelo Flavio Comneno. But until today, we have no evidence that the Spata had done the same. Medieval history is murky, full of inaccuracies and hearsay. Surely you would know this by now, having done your own research. Kj1595 (talk) 01:40, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I was aware of both actually but fair point. The Spata are not cited as having originated in Angelokastron, but rather in Delvinë, with Pietro Bua Spata as one of it's first "attested" members (attested used very loosely, as there is not much information on said figure). As for the names, names can have many different ways of being spelled and pronounced. The Spata pop up as the Shpata, Spata, Sphata and the Spatafora as the Spadafora in some instances. In 1409, the Spatafora became patricians of Venice. Before the Ottoman conquest of Albania, Albanian noble families did not move massively into Italy, apart from the few who were based in the territories of Ragusa and Albania Veneta. From what is known, the Shpata were eventually overtaken by the Bua, who moved further into Greece. When members of the Bua were documented abroad, in places like France, the Holy Roman Empire etc, the Spatafora were already an established and entitled noble family, who ruled over large estates, towns and held important ranks. The Spata did intermarry with some Italian Nobility, but those descendants took the Italian last names (Charles Marchesano and Maddalena Marchesano). There was a cultural difference between both, with members of the Spata, like Yaqub converting to Islam, something which would've been extremely uncommon for Italian nobility, in Italy and the Balkans. FlorianShpata (talk) 10:46, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
 * It seems that a noble Romana family by the name of Spada existed once. And they used a distinctly different coat of arms from that of the Spatafora, the latter of which, naturally resembles the raised swords of the Spani and the Mataranga. Kj1595 (talk) 15:43, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Interesting. Definitely worth noting. FlorianShpata (talk) 11:44, 11 March 2024 (UTC)