All Spain blogs

Start your own blog

Blog RSS

I Wonder Why...?

I will be writing about aspects of Spanish history and their traditions. I am a very curious person and have always needed to know "why" they do it, and "how" it came about. So over the years while living in Spain I have made a conscious effort to discover "el porque de las cosas" and I will be sharing them with you. I hope you find it as fascinating as I do.

Catalonia is Spain
Wednesday, September 17, 2014 @ 2:43 PM

This week and last I have noticed a couple of posts on EOS related to the independence of Catalonia and it has always been a topic that has really interested me. Personally I am more inclined to believe that Catalonia should stay a part of Spain and doesn’t have a real historical claim to independence. I am not an expert on Catalan history but I am informed and have read a fair bit, however it seems there are no experts on the matter, as many of the experts simply disagree or interpret history to benefit their own position especially Catalan politicians, so it is very difficult to get to the truth. Nonetheless I will endeavour to share my view or opinion on the matter and how I understand it. It may give you another perspective.

It is undeniable that the territory of Catalonia (as it is known today) has always shared, since ancient times, the political and cultural destiny of the rest of the Iberian Peninsula. Catalonia and Spain are not two entities that can confront each other because Catalonia is essentially a part of Spain. One must remember that Spain is not a single nation or unique culture but a grouping of cultures, traditions, kingdoms, nations, counties and regions that all together and united are called Spain. Catalonia comprises this and it was determined by all in the constitution that this unification was indivisible. This explains the illegality of the upcoming referendum but underneath all this does Catalonia really have a right sovereignty? Was it ever an independent country? Did Spain really conquer Catalonia in 1714?

Nationalists tend to put the date of 1714 as the origin of this oppression: When Philip V abolished the Catalan institutions, after the fall of Barcelona to the Bourbon troops. At that time, Catalonia was already part of the Hispanic Crown and had been since the fifteenth century, the result of a process of peninsular reunification.

The Crown of Aragon encompassed the all of the territories that were under the jurisdiction of the King of Aragon, (1164-1707) including what we call today Catalonia. On November 13th 1137, Ramon Berenguer, Count of Barcelona and Queen of Aragon Doña Petronila get married and this results in the transfer of the County of Barcelona to the Kingdom of Aragon and not the other way around, as Catalan nationalists would like to believe. The crown of Aragon was always the dominant power. In 1164, Alfonso II of Aragon inherited the entire royal estate.
Later, with the union of the kingdom and county under a single crown, he would expand his territories to include other domains: mainly the kingdom of Mallorca, Valencia, Sicily, Corsica, Sardinia and Naples, as well as the duchies of Athens (from 1331-1388) and Neopatria (between 1319 and 1390). With the marriage of the Catholic Monarchs in 1469, the process of convergence with the Crown of Castile would begin, forming the basis of what would later become the Crown of Spain.

But lets not forget, the reunification process of 1137 simply brought back the political and cultural unity which had been enjoyed in the Peninsula since the ancient Roman times and the times of the Visigoth Kings.

Therefore, in 1714, Catalonia was not an independent country that was conquered by a foreign country (Spain), but it was already part of the Spanish Crown and had been for over two centuries, and part of the same ‘cultural-political’ entity as other regions since the times of the Romans.

What’s more important is that in 1714, the Catalans who fought against the Bourbons (not against the Castilians -‘Spanish’) did not want independence at all, but they were fighting for the Austrian candidate to become head of the Spanish crown, not the French suitor who was Philip of Anjou.

Indeed, both the Councillor in charge, Rafael Casanova, as well as General Villarroel, who commanded the troops, always clearly expressed that they fought for their fleet and the Crown of Spain. Therefore, in 1714 there was no claim sovereignty. In fact the first ‘claim’ to sovereignty started with the political movements a little over a century ago.

Unbelievably the Catalan government has been manipulating this event for decades, they even went to the extent of manipulating an etching from the time changing the Dutch flag of a battle ship to a Spanish flag, making all viewers believe that Catalonia was under attack from ‘Spain’. Incredible, but true.

I’ll let you decide the reasons behind that move.

The events of 1700-1714 can be summarised as follows:

Before 1700 Catalonia was not independent but was a territory with its own institutions comfortably integrated into the Spanish Crown for centuries. That year, King Charles II (of Spain, including Catalonia) died without an heir and a war of succession to the throne began (not a sovereignty secession) between two candidates: Philippe of Anjou – French, and Charles of Habsburg – German. In all the territories of the Crown there were supporters for both candidates. It wasn’t an issue that only affected what is known today as “Catalonia”.

The Catalan institutions first swore allegiance to Philippe of Anjou (Courts of Barcelona January 14, 1702), but after an Anglo-Dutch fleet in favour of Charles landed in the river Besos (August 25, 1705) and conquered Barcelona to the indifference of the population. On October 16 the Catalan institutions recognised Charles as King of Spain.

Finally, the war ended with the resignation of Charles to the throne (as had been elected Holy Roman Emperor) and Philippe V was unopposed to the throne. He amnestied the leaders of the Habsburg revolt, but abolished the Catalan institutions, creating a centralised state imitating that of France at the time.

The institutions of the eighteenth century were estates, typical of feudalism representing the aristocracy, bourgeoisie and upper clergy. They defended, therefore, the interests of these. There was no Parliament, as we know it today, as national and popular sovereignty were concepts that appeared later on, not known at the time of these events.

Every September 11 the Catalans celebrate “The Day of Catalonia”. However this has only happened since 1980. Partly due to Franco’s regime, yes, but historically there is not independence movement prior to the late 1890’s and the celebration of “The Day of Catalonia” never occurred before the 1980’s and only came about with the growing power of the nationalist politicians. With it they commemorate and remember the surrender of Barcelona to the Bourbon troops during the course of the War of Spanish Succession 11 September 1714. One of their rituals is to lay a wreath at a memorial for Counsellor Rafael Casanova, presenting him as a martyr to the fall of Barcelona when in fact he died twenty-nine years later (in 1743).

From this great historical lie (amongst others) we will discover how Catalan nationalism is pushing myths to present the region of Catalonia as an occupied country and seized by Spain.

In conclusion: In schools in Catalonia it is explained and taught that Catalonia was conquered, but the whole fact, neither the original oath that the Catalans made to Felipe V, nor the inheritance will of Charles II, nor the subsequent betrayal of the institutions that later swore legitimacy to Charles of Habsburg (who was an intruder with his army and occupied Barcelona without any legitimacy)

Unfortunately they appear to be more nationalist myths. Myths and lies, in order to model the history of nationalist interests. There was no conquest by Spain.

The famous historian Henry Kamen warns of the falsification of the history of Catalonia and published a new book called "Spain and Catalonia. History of a passion', which criticizes the "falsification of history" that, in his view, presented the Catalan separatists, including CiU and ERC, to defend the independence of Catalonia and the sovereignty process. He says:

"If the separatists offer lies, as a simple historian I examine the material" and conclude that "there is a manipulation of facts in favour of separatism"

Kamen said that "there is no historical basis to provide support to the separation" and that "the historical context is being distorted by the Catalan government."

One of the episodes that have been manipulated is, in his opinion, the War of Succession, as some say that "Catalonia was crushed" and went into "economic misery" after September 11, 1714, date of the surrender of Barcelona.

Catalonia was not crushed in 1714. However, Catalonia "remained an important, prosperous and thriving region, Spain's richest territory," stressed Kamen, who considers "almost impossible" to support with evidence the historical argument of "plundering" of Catalonia from Spain.

Also, in his book he rejects the version according to which the Spanish State attacked the people of Catalonia-which rebelled against it-and ended abolishing its democratic laws and imposing a regime of terror. Kamen doubts that a majority of Catalans rose against Felipe V and indicates that it was Barcelona itself that caused the abolition of the “Catalan institutions” as well as stating that in 1714 the rebels were "strong supporters of the unity of Spain". But to be more precise and clarify that there were no parliamentary institutions, as we know today that represented the people, just institutions that represented the rich and privileged.

Other historians and journalists have spoken up on this manipulation too. Cesar Vidal says that in the declaration of sovereignty by the Catalan Parliament it refers to certain historical events that supposedly justify their independence, which he says, is “absurd and idiotic” however not way near as bad at what happened in the 1987 when Jordi Pujol, the Catalan leader, invented the Catalan Millennium celebration, costing the Catalan people a fortune. Catalonia didn’t even exist in 987.

Vidal says that the independence declaration in the Catalan Parliament refers to the self-government of Catalonia as being based on the assemblies of Pau and Treba, in the County Court and later on in the 14th Century in the general council or Generalitat which later turned into the Government of the Principality of Catalonia. “This is absolutely false and total nonsense” say Vidal, “firstly, the county court didn’t appear until the 11th century and as it’s name explains it was a county court not a general assembly or a parliament nor anything similar”. The assemblies of Pau y Treba were ecclesiastical institutions that applied two types of institutions “The Peace of God and the Truce of God”. They have nothing whatsoever to do with a parliamentary systems.” This as well as other discrepancies has caused anger amongst historians.

The simple truth is before 1714 and before 1700, Catalonia was not independent, but formed part of the Spanish Crown and never had any intention to fight for independence. In fact independence was never an issue in those days or even contemplated.

This is how many others and I see it, I am open to any corrections or clarifications, so long as they are founded with historical evidence.

0 Like

Permalink

Spam post or Abuse? Please let us know

33 Comments

simonharris said:
Thursday, September 18, 2014 @ 6:22 PM

I'd have to write a response as long as your article to answer all your points, Michael, so let's take things chronologically

1. 987 - Borrell II - Count of Barcelona, Osona, Girona and Urgell declared independence/sovereignty from the Franks - not Catalonia yet but a big chunk of territory and by then the Count of Barcelona was considered primus inter pares or first amongst equals of the counts that ruled the Marca Hispanica

2. 1137 - Ramon Berenguer IV married one-year-old Petronila of Aragon and the Regno, Dominio et Corona Aragonum et Catalonie was created - the two territories retained their own courts and laws by mutual agreement - future rulers had to swear allegiance separately to the Corts Catalanes and Aragoneses

3. 1232 - Jaume I conquered Mallorca mainly with Catalan troops - in 1238, he took Valencia with a combination of Catalan and Aragonese troops (as well as Knights Templar, btw) - these were also given their own systems of government and the Crown of Aragon now comprised the Kingdom of Aragon, the Kingdom of Valencia, the Kingdom of Mallorca and the Principality of Catalonia - these four 'states' normally had the same ruler but not always as sometimes monarchs would divided territories up between their sons

4. at this point, expansion on the Iberian peninsula stopped and the Crown of Aragon looked out towards the Mediterranean - other cities were inportant but Barcelona, being a port, was the city from which the confederation conquered Sicily, Sardinia, Naples, Milan and most of southern Greece - it's for this reason that the Archives of the Crown of Aragon are in Barcelona

5. Ferdinand and Isabel married in 1469 - Isabel became Queen of Castile in 1474 and Ferdinand became King of (the Crown of) Aragon (which included Aragon, Catalonia, Valencia, Mallorca, Sardinia, Naples and other territories) in 1479 - the two states remained separate

6. their grandson Carlos became ruler of the Spanish Empire (which included Castile, the Crown of Aragon states and the Americas) in 1516 and Holy Roman Emperor in 1519 - he had already become King of the Netherlands and Burgundy in 1506 - he was Carlos I of Spain but he is known as Carlos V because Holy Roman Emperor was the most important title - all these territories were governed separately which was a massive headache

Time for a rest ... I'll deal with the War of the Spanish Succession and its consequences separately a bit later

simonharris said:
Thursday, September 18, 2014 @ 8:44 PM

7.To put it simply, Catalonia was a group of counties that took the most powerful count as their ruler based on consensus, this 'state' then formed part of a confederation of states known as the Crown of Aragon, which then became part of a composite monarchy called the Spanish Empire ... Castilians and Catalans didn't start considering themselves Spaniards until much later.

8. Felipe II made Madrid capital of the empire in 1561 and despite being technically different realms, there was an increasing tendency to want to centralise govt and particularly levy taxes to fight Castilian wars ... the Netherlands for example. The Catalans (and other Aragonese states) were very jealous of their laws and institutions because these guaranteed their privileges.

9. The first major revolt was the Reapers' War in the 1640s was provoked by Count-Duke Olivares Union of Arms, which attempted to levy Catalan taxes and conscript Catalan soldiers to fight the 'foreign' Thirty Years War. Catalonia declared itself 'independent' from the monarchy and pledged allegiance to the French crown in return for guarantees on its charters and institutions. A dreadful mistake but the motivation was to protect independence.

10. The War of Spanish Succession wasn't a war of independence and the Crown of Aragon initially pledged allegiance to the Bourbon Felipe V but Archduke Charles of Austria and the English promised them a better deal on their (you guessed it) laws and institutions in the Treaty of Genoa in 1705 so they changed sides.
Aragon and Valencia were take by the Franco-Castilian troops by 1707 under the Duke of Berwick and all their laws and institutions were revoked and there was a lot of brutally. Hundreds of Valencian exiles fled to Barcelona.
When England, Holland and Austria pulled out of the war and signed the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713, the Catalans (and Mallorcans) decided to fight on and Barcelona finally fell after a 15-month siege on Sep 11th 1714.
11. Felipe V abolished all institutions under the Nueva Planta Decree and all governmen roles were taken by Castilians (or Catalans who had been loyal). The Castilian language was imposed, Catalan books were burned and all universities were closed. A new tax called the Real Cadastre was imposed and a citadel with 30,000 troops was built to control Barcelona. The old county system was changed and the Castilian system of corregidors was imposed. The taxes and having to provide lodgings for the troops meant that Catalonia was economically destroyed for the next 50 years.
12. In the 1760s Catalonia was allowed to trade with the Americas for the first time and the economic boom began. First cheap liquor and then textiles led to the industrial revolution.

No comment on Kamen and Vidal. Most of what I've written above can be sourced on Wikipedia in English, Spanish and Catalan. I've also used J.H.Elliot's Imperial Spain which was written in 1963 and certainly wasn't politically motivated.

Last point ... an indication that Catalonia was the dominant member of the Crown of Aragon is that its language was spoken in both the Balearics and Valencia and Castilian wasn't introduced until after the War of Succession. It is also spoken in Sardinia and I once manage to communicate with an Italian woman who speaking dialect almost perfectly using Catalan.

And one more ... I wasn't born in favour of Catalan independence but when I began to read mainly English historians, I became convinced that there were some Spanish historians telling porky pies. I'm also passionate about the wonderful language and have been here long enough to have heard many first hand stories about the Franco period.

SandrainAlgorfa said:
Friday, September 19, 2014 @ 1:41 AM

The main point I'd take issue with is that Diada Nacional De Catalonia was celebrated from 1886 until it was suppressed by Franco in 1939, after the Civil War. It was reinstated in 1980, so it is certainly not a recent invention.

And there are many primary sources which confirm that Catalonia was indeed conquered by Spain in 1714.

However, the main problem I have with this - and of course you are entitled to your opinion, as indeed I am to mine - is the constant use of the terms 'nationalist' and 'separatist' to describe Catalans who are pro independence. It's a negative and inaccurate description, which has been overused in the media and picked up by too many commenters. I think patriot is a more accurate description. Again, that's my opinion.

Thomas Oliver said:
Friday, September 19, 2014 @ 8:44 PM

Firstly I would like to thank you both for commenting and especially Simon for going to such extent to reply to my post. I am really impressed and extremely grateful for the time you have taken to explain yourself. I know how long I took to write my post so I can guess the time you took to reply. Now your reply is so extensive I will probably need to write another article to answer your points. But I would like to focus on what I think are the key points and the real foundations of the historic discrepancies between pro-Catalonia and Pro-Spain.

But before I do that I would like to briefly answer Sandra. The Diada as we know it today is claimed to have started in1886 but in reality it was never “The Day of Catalonia” but a political move from the up and coming nationalist party of the time which used the manipulated story of the “conseller en cap” Raphael Casanova as a tool to support their nationalist movement. At that time it was only commemorative floral offering. So as a national holiday and officially “The day of Catalonia” it has only existed since 1980. Pro-Catalanes will obviously argue differently but one way of looking at this is by asking the question “Why don’t all Catalans celebrate the Diada, if it really is a day for celebrating Catalonia?”

Many Catalans don’t celebrate it as they do not see it as realistic representation of history or a civic festivity aimed at all Catalan citizens. It has a very strong and intentional air of independence about it, not shared by all Catalans.

Of course you are entitled to your opinion, but I don’t see why you have such a problem with the words Nationalism and Separatism. Why is it negative? They believe in what they want and that’s it, its politics. Why does it have to be interpreted as negative. You make it look like racism or something of the sorts. Nor is it inaccurate. Catalonia was never invaded by ‘Spain’ in 1714. It was a war of succession not secession-independence, please cite the primary sources as that is, I am afraid is totally inaccurate. The pro-Hapsburg Catalans fell to the Bourbons in 1714 in a claim to the throne. It was not a ‘Spain-Catalonia’ war but a Hapsburg- Bourbon battle in which the Catalans and other regions and counties participated.

Your use of the word “patriotic” is very poetic and very moving. But before ‘patriotism’ there is ‘nationalism’, they go hand in hand. This is not like Scotland fighting for its freedom under the English oppression. Nationalism and separatism are words used by the pro- independence Catalans themselves. Why because they believe in their ‘Nation’ and want o separate from Spain. There is nothing wrong with the words.

Over the past 100 years Catalonia has experienced and demographic explosion thanks to emigration from the rest of Spain. More than 80% of modern day Catalans’ have a grandparent who is not Catalan providing benefits for the region and making it what it is today, a region with over 6,000,000 inhabitants. So you could say modern day Catalonia was built by non-Catalans.

You might say if that is the case how come there is such a strong feeling for independence. Well it clearly shows how easy it is to manipulate a population in just two generations, by teaching them erroneous history at school and encouraging separatist feelings, which can become very contagious. It is similar to what Spain has always done when teaching the discovery and colonisation of South America. It is full of ‘interpretations’ and discrepancies.

We can dig into history and explain all the facts you want but one inevitable fact is that Catalonia does not have a right to sovereignty, which ever way you want to look at it, well that’s not entirely true, if you want to manipulate the records a little you could fight for any side if we look at it historically.

The key to the argument is if you consider an autonomous county over 1000 years ago to be a country in its own right and a nation, because it was only from 987 to 1136 century that the County of Barcelona was not under an overlordship.

Before that it was under the king of the Franks and after that it was included into the Crown of Aragon. Yes it had its autonomy within the Crown, but much like it does today. However there are very strong arguments to say that the Kingdom of Aragon was the dominant partner, not the county of Barcelona, even though they respected each other. It also goes to prove that the union was peaceful and Barcelona didn’t want to continue being independent.

I personally do not consider this to be a lawful claim to independence, nor a definition of a nation. Catalonia was not born in 987 in my opinion. That is just absurd. Borell II declared independence by not signing allegiance to the king of the Franks but initially we are talking about a couple of Christian counties set up by the Franks to buffer the expansion of the Moors, remember it was the King of the Franks that created the title of ‘Count of Barcelona’, it didn’t exist beforehand. So it was a very long way from being Catalonia. From that point on the county of Barcelona was never truly independent again, yes it became a composite monarchy but with just one Monarch, the King of Aragon who also inherited the title of the Count of Barcelona. It wasn’t until the XIV century that it became a Principality and even then it never reigned on its own. Never a Kingdom and never was it considered a nation. To be considered a nation is something very relative, I agree, but nations are nations because other nations recognise them as being nations and in turn countries. This has never been the case with Catalonia. Which country would support Catalonia’s claim to be a nation? Apart from themselves, of course. These are not just my thoughts but also thoughts shared by many historians and experts such as Jesus Royo Catalan Professor (by birth) at the Institute for the Catalan language (IEC) , also a qualified philosopher. There is so much more to comment on but that’s enough for now. Catalan history is plagued with discrepancies and manipulations on the Internet and even in the textbooks. It’s a very long discussion, which has many more political influences than historical. To be continued….

simonharris said:
Friday, September 19, 2014 @ 9:15 PM

As you say, Thomas, we could go on forever but La Diada was first celebrated in 1886 and has always had a political element because (for Catalanists) it commemorates the loss of their political institutions and charters.

It was made illegal under Primo de Rivera and institutionalised during the Second Republic before being banned again under Franco, when it was celebrated clandestinely.

There was a small Diada in 1976 in Sant Boi de Llobregat and in 1977, a massive Diada in Barcelona and since then it's been celebrated every year since then.

It officially was declared a public holiday and the Catalan National Day in 1980 by the recently reconstituted Generalitat but it was always celebrated before that. You can't claim it didn't exist because it was celebrated in secret as it had been banned by a fascist dictator.

If we can't agree even on this, there's not much point in continuing ...

By the way, the title of the book - Catalonia Is Not Spain - is deliberately provocative and apart from a very dry 4 volume History of Catalonia I have deliberately eschewed Catalan historians. My main texts have been Robert Hughes Barcelona, JH Elliot Imperial Spain and Daniele Conversi The Basques, the Catalans and Spain. I have then used Wikipedia in three languages ... as it's produced by groups it tends to be quite reliable although you get more detail depending on the language. Apart from that YouTube ... the whole of Memoria de España, for example ... a pretty fair selection I'd say!

In my research for the book, I have deliberately eschewed Catalan historians

Old Limey said:
Saturday, September 20, 2014 @ 1:38 PM

@simon harris: Some provisos on the points you make:

- Borrell II never 'declared' independence, independence of the County of Barcelona is a gradual process. Independence around 980s is assumed as he failed to make an oath of alliegance to the Frankish sovereign. At that time the county only controlled a fraction of Catalonia (not a big chunk). Formal separation from the Frankish kindom did not occured until the Treaty of Corbeil in the 13th century.

- Ramon Berenguer and Petronila did not marry to institute the 'Regno, Dominio et Corona Aragonum et Catalonie', that term is only ever used ONCE in a treaty two centuries later (1286). Commonly the Crown of Aragon was known as "Corona Regum Aragoniae" (Crown of the Kings of Aragon). The County of Barcelona was the dowry given to the Aragonese.

- Formally, there has never been a Principalty of Catalonia. That name was used ocasionally to refer to the territories of the Crown of Aragon under the authority of the Catalan Courts.

And I could keep going through all your post.

Separately, this may look like minor facts, but altogether they drive to the same conclusion: the misrepresentation of the low middle ages political structures of courts and juntas as an independent country that never existed.

That is the very point of Henry Kamen's book.

Old Limey said:
Saturday, September 20, 2014 @ 1:54 PM

"and there are many primary sources which confirm that Catalonia was indeed conquered by Spain in 1714"

Such as?

(I mean, excluding those on the payroll of the Catalan government).

simonharris said:
Saturday, September 20, 2014 @ 2:33 PM

Thanks for your reply, Old Limey

I think in the text of the book I say something like ... and from then on Borrell II stopped being a vassal of ...

I've found a lot of conflicting results on ... Regno, Dominio et Corona Aragonum et Catalonie so I'll check

Where do I say "and there are many primary sources which confirm that Catalonia was indeed conquered by Spain in 1714" ... I may have done so by mistake but would have been likely to use Castile/Felipe V/Franco-Castilian troops as the crux of my argument is that 'Spain' didn't really exist as we understand it until after 1714.

Thanks for your comments. They'll force me to tighten up my text.

rsanchezlamoso said:
Sunday, September 21, 2014 @ 2:15 AM

Thank you all for all your comments and shared information. All of this shows and conclude in that:

1. Catalonia was never a separate country or (nation), it was a region or county part of the Kingdom of Aragon..

2. The kingdoms of Castille and Aragon (unified) through the marriage of Isabel from Castille and Fernando from Aragon, in the fourteen hundreds..

3. The Catalans had a history of being rebellious..

4. Catalans were oppressed during Franco´s dictatorship..

5. Catalans have a strong feeling for their own sense of "nation", so they have manipulated history books and have pushed the propaganda and marketing machinery to their convenience, to achieve their purpose. They even say that Christopher Columbus was Catalan, his statue on the Barcelona port is to honor him with his achievement as "Catalan"..

6. Catalan children are being put through an "inmersion" program to be brainwashed with nationalistic feelings, and to hate the "oppressor from Madrid"..

7. Catalonia has been built to what it is today, mainly by migration of people from other areas of Spain, by doing business with other regions of Spain and the Americas, and was reconstructed after the civil war by the hard work of many Andalusians and other Spaniards..

8. All Catalan speakers know Spanish, but many Catalans don´t know Catalan. The push to learn Catalan was promoted by Jordi Pujol and CiU, around the 80s when it was being said that the Catalan language was practically dead..

9. Spain is not "Andalusian flamenco", it is formed by a combination of different people from different regions, all with their own culture and traditions..

10. The history and case of Catalonia is totally different to the Scotish one..

11. The November "referendum" will be illegal, and Catalonia could have their Autonomia revoked, which could be a big tragedy for them, given the level of autonomy achieved up to date..

12. According to the Spanish constituton, the whole Spain will have to vote to decide if Catalonia can become independent..

Conclusion: Catalonia is Spain..

bapcav said:
Sunday, September 21, 2014 @ 4:21 PM

All these points could be made about Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, C+ech republic, Slovak Republic, Serbia, Bosnia and, indeed, Portugal. ( There are many others.)

Does Oliver Hardy want them all to be given back to their previous "masters" - Putin, for instance ?

nrosullivan said:
Sunday, September 21, 2014 @ 5:42 PM

Fascinating stuff ! And despite an M.A. in Spanish, Catalonia has never featured much in my studies so I could not possibly argue with rsanchezlamoso or simonharris and I am grateful to both for such erudition and enlightenment. However, there are parallels with Scotland in the context of mutual hatred. Many, if not most Spaniards hate the Catalans and vice versa. Basically, they are a "bloody nuisance." There is no love lost between them. But, love them or hate them, Catalonia is extremely important economically. Although Madrid has made great strides in recent years to catch up, Barcelona is the commercial capital of Spain (created as such by Franco in the vain hope of shutting them up !)Without Catalonia, Spain drops out of the G8. It is more important than Scotland. Personally, i think that if they manage to get their (illegal) referendum, they will go.

Draven said:
Tuesday, September 23, 2014 @ 6:31 PM

I am so sorry to interrupt your talking, but you have mentioned so wrong points (voluntarily) and I understand someone should clarify them. So do not feel offended if I copy-paste your posts before, as it is only an easy way for me to answer.

1. Catalonia was never a separate country or (nation), it was a region or county part of the Kingdom of Aragon.

False. Catalonia was born (as a country or, if you preffer, independent "entity") in the year 980 approx, when the count of Barcelona Borrell II stops his homage to the king of francs. As you can see, from that year to 1137 there is a long long journey of the catalans alone.

In the year 1137 Catalonia and the Kingdom of Aragon become the same country through the marriage of the count of Barcelona Ramon Berenguer III and the princes of Aragon Petronila. Anyway the capital of the newborn country is Barcelona, the court is held in Barcelona and the language of the kings and the court is Catalan until the Casp meeting, in 1412. So please, do not summarize it saying Catalonia was not a country because it is falso. Get informed, please.

2. The kingdoms of Castille and Aragon (unified) through the marriage of Isabel from Castille and Fernando from Aragon, in the fourteen hundreds.

Correct.

3. The Catalans had a history of being rebellious.

He he he. Sorry, I cannot help laughing about it. It is your point of view. I see it different. My point of view is that the Spanish had a history of being tyranical, cultural genocides and politically intolerants. Obviously all these leads to rebellion or to submission... what Spain is asking the Catalans without success.

4. Catalans were oppressed during Franco´s dictatorship.

Correct. But it is not the only moment of oppression during history we have had to handle with.

5. Catalans have a strong feeling for their own sense of "nation", so they have manipulated history books and have pushed the propaganda and marketing machinery to their convenience, to achieve their purpose. They even say that Christopher Columbus was Catalan, his statue on the Barcelona port is to honor him with his achievement as "Catalan".

False. Do not talk about propaganda when during 40 years all the students in Spain had to memorize the sentence "Spain is a destiny unit in the universe". And the monument to CC in Barcelona is not to honor him as Catalan (because it is suposed to be from Genova, but it is still unknown) but because when coming back in the first trip to America he was received by the Catholic King and Queen in Barcelona.

6. Catalan children are being put through an "inmersion" program to be brainwashed with nationalistic feelings, and to hate the "oppressor from Madrid".

False. Have you studied in a Catalan school? How do you know that? Do you know someone who knows someone who knows someone who says he has studied in a Catalan school? Please confirm, because in Education I can speak freely and with a lot of resources (I work in this field).

7. Catalonia has been built to what it is today, mainly by migration of people from other areas of Spain, by doing business with other regions of Spain and the Americas, and was reconstructed after the civil war by the hard work of many Andalusians and other Spaniards.

Mmmmm... sorry me, but I am wondering... if Catalonia has been reconstructed with the hard work of Spanish people coming to Catalonia, then how do you explain that these people now wants to be independent from Spain? Oh, I suppose it is because of the brainwash... Yes, ok.

Well, the fact is that after the discovery of America Catalonia was forbidden to commerce with America, so all the gold, spices and bussiness was dealt by Castilla. Therefore Catalonian commerce fleet was almost useless, as the Mediterranean had few things to offer comparing to the Atlantic ocean. One more time please, get informed.

8. All Catalan speakers know Spanish, but many Catalans don´t know Catalan. The push to learn Catalan was promoted by Jordi Pujol and CiU, around the 80s when it was being said that the Catalan language was practically dead.

Remember that according to Spanish law both languages are official in Catalonia, so both should be known by the people of Catalonia. If one of them is not well known we must teach it in schools and emphasize its use in order to get an equal use of both. Nevertheless in Spain there is still people that think that Catalan is a dialect of French, when it is a latin language equal to Spanish, French, Italian, Romanian, Portuguese, etc.

9. Spain is not "Andalusian flamenco", it is formed by a combination of different people from different regions, all with their own culture and traditions.

Yes, you kill bulls by sport (high cultural level). It is not only that I dislike the Spanish ¿culture?, it is that it is NOT my culture.

10. The history and case of Catalonia is totally different to the Scotish one.

Of course, and it is different to the history of Irak, and to the history of China, and to the history of Norway.

11. The November "referendum" will be illegal, and Catalonia could have their Autonomia revoked, which could be a big tragedy for them, given the level of autonomy achieved up to date.

False. The November referendum will be illegal according to Spanish interpretation of the law. The law says (literally) that only the Spanish government can do a referendum. What the Catalan government has done is a Question to the Catalan people, accepting it is only to know the answer and accepting it has no political implications (Catalan consulting law). So tell me where is the illegal referendum, please. Because we are not going to do any referendum.

12. According to the Spanish constituton, the whole Spain will have to vote to decide if Catalonia can become independent.

According to the Spanish constitution you can claim the moon is yours, but NEVER in history a country has voted in the autodetermination of another territory (the English did not vote in the Scottish referendum, the Canadians did not in the Quebequians, Serbians in Montenegrians, etc).

And please, something I consider that must be clear to everybody: in Scotland nobody was discussing if Scotland was a nation or not (it was accepted it was, of course) only the possibility of secession. In Catalonia we are denyed the recognition of being a nation, so we are only a "nationality"... (a nationality that is worth the 23% of the PIB, the 15% of the Spanish population and the 7% of the public government investments). So we pay the 23% and we receive only the 7%, and they call it "solidarity".

I was taught in school that the solidarity (by definition) is voluntarily, if it is mandatory then it is only robbery.

Conclusion: Catalonia is Spain.

... until next year. Catalonia will be what Catalans want it to be. Not more, not less.

Pauly said:
Tuesday, September 23, 2014 @ 8:11 PM

A bit depressing reading through this. Despite it being obviously mainly non spaniards or Catalans the arguments have the same ridiculous all or nothing air to them. The nation state that we know today was simply not in existence until the mid 17th century and even then took centuries to spread as a concept so we cannot judge historical situations using today's concepts.

If the Catalan people feel a distinct difference to the rest of Spain let them vote but only after a proper fair debate. The vote on 9N will be nothing more than a bad joke sadly.

Thomas Oliver said:
Tuesday, September 23, 2014 @ 10:54 PM

Draven

I really have to thank you so much for taking the time to leave a comment it really helps me prove some of my points. You are clearly not native English but Spanish brought up in Catalonia from your comments or maybe I should say Catalan as you are obviously Pro-Catalan. The Spanish bit might offend you and thats the last thing I would want. I think first of all you need to take some of rsanchezlamoso's comments with a pinch of salt and humor. So I have no intention of replying to all of your replies. But I will make some comments.

I find it terribly worrying that a teacher (as you say you are) believes that Catalonia was born in 980. You can't possibly say that, even the educated historians in favor of independence agree on that. The word Catalonia isn't even mentioned until the second half of the 13th Century. Its first mention in Catalan is in 'El LIbro de Hechos' de Jaime I, so Borell II had no idea what it even was. The language Catalan wasn't even being used in 980. It was no more than a Christian county that separated from the Franks and was only independent as a county for 150 years or so, which is nothing in historic terms. The title 'count of Barcelona' was created by the Franks as was the region.

So it wasn't 'Catalonia' that united with the Kingdom of Aragon but the county of Barcelona, which was exactly that, a county, un condado, no un pais. Not a country. But thats what they teach you at school so it's understandable you think that way.

I have family who have studied in a Catalan school and I know very well how catalan history if taught there. And it is clear from how you think that my comments on this are in the right. You actually believe what you are writing. Which goes to show how easy it is to manipulate society, even teachers, so imagine Joe Blogs.

I hope you are not a history teacher. I certainly am not, but If I wanted to defend Catalonia's claim to independence I would be far more careful with the historical facts I stated, as are other people who are commenting on here, who clearly know more about Catalan history than some Catalans. Very worrying.

BTW thanks to everyone for taking the time to leave a comment, all very interesting.

simonharris said:
Wednesday, September 24, 2014 @ 4:44 AM

I think Pauly's point is the most pertinent ... nation-states as we understand them didn't exist until the 17th (I would actually say the 18th or even 19th centuries)

One of my motivations for writing the book was to debunk the argument "Catalonia never existed in the past so it's got no right to exist in the present or the future" ... It didn't exist in the terms we understand nation-states today but there's nothing wrong with school teachers teaching key events and historical figures that led to its formation. (The decision of Borrell II not to continue as vassal of the Franks is undoubtedly a key moment for what was to become Catalonia some centuries later!)

By the same 'regla de tres' you could criticise teachers for teaching La Reconquista, which is a much less historicall solid and even more politically charged nation myth.

So I think we're quits on that one, aren't we?

Draven said:
Wednesday, September 24, 2014 @ 8:34 AM

Sorry Thomas, but it is very easy to consider the others manipulated wuile you are convinced that the you defend the truth.

Maybe I have not explained my point very well (language knowledge limitations, you know). So let me answer the points you mention in your last post.

Borrell II count of Barcelona became independent from the king of francs altogether with other counts of what is known as Marca Hispánica. So it was not only the count of Barcelona, but some others too. It is always Borrell II who we remember because he was the most powerful and rich of all of them, and in fact he was the leader of those counts who broke allegiance to the franc king. Therefore it is not correct to say that in 1137 the count of Barcelona (only) united Barcelona with the Kingdom of Aragon. The marriage united all the territory that we know today as Catalonia with Aragon, because the other counts swore allegiance to him from the very first day.

Many claim that he was not a king. It is right, as the title of KIng had to be recognized by others, so he actually was not. Nevertheless he ruled as one, and the marriage between Ramon Berenguer IV and Petronila was not a homage to Aragon, but a unity between equals.

However I read lately a lot of posts of people discussing if Catalonia has ever been an independent country or not, if it was only a small territory attached to the kingdom of Aragon and so many other topics (real or not) that are not the point we mind.

The point is that the Catalan people want to vote. And you go out in the streets and listen to the conversations of people and hey, the boy who works in the supermarket and the waiter of the cafe do not give a damn if Catalonia has ever been an independent country or not. What they say is that it is going to become one. So history lessons to ordinary people are useless simply because they do not mind (I have to admit that I like history and that is why I will try to answer your posts... if I can). What the Spanish try to do is to deny the legitimacy of the Catalan people through the use and abuse of history, and it seems they do not understand that it is futile.

So if you want to continue talking about history it is fine, but do not link it to the people legitimacy to vote for the independence. The world is full of colonies that became independents and were not independent countries in the past. I am sure you know many examples.

Thomas Oliver said:
Wednesday, September 24, 2014 @ 12:19 PM

Simon, you said it: 'some centuries later'. So it is not correct to say that catalonia was born in 987. The Catalans and yourself say he declared independence which is a bit inaccurate isn't it?. When the Moors attacked and took Barcelona, Borell ran into the mountains waiting for help from the Franks which never came, he had no choice but to reach an agreement with the Califato of Cordoba, reaching that agreement he then had no need for the French monarchs support so with the change of Monarch in the Franks kingdom, he took advantage and didn't sign allegiance to the new King. Not exactly a declaration of independence.

And for your 'regla de tres', two wrongs don't make a right. It's not a question of tit for tat, or quits. Both are fundamentally wrong, but the question here isn't how the Reconquista is being taught but the History/Independence of Catalonia.

Neither are accurate.

Draven I only quote history. It's certain peoples interpretation that is biased. The facts are out there. I think enough has been said about Borrell II who is made out to be national hero. If I am not mistaken he only took part in two battles of which both he lost.

However dravin I think your most valid point is this one :

"the boy who works in the supermarket and the waiter of the cafe do not give a damn if Catalonia has ever been an independent country or not"

so history isn't important to them, because most of them don't know the history. Maybe if they knew the history they might start to realise that Spain was very important for the Growth and strength of Catalonia historically and without the rest of Spain where they might be today. Although powerful as it may have been, it was never powerful enough to stand alone and a true independent power. That is a fact. Now if you say to me Catalonia wants its independence for the first time as colonies have done so in the past…that might be different but then again colonies were invaded Catalonia always lived hand in hand with Spain's kingdoms throughout history, it wasn't invaded as such. Like colonies were. So the only argument I could accept would be that the people of Catalonia truly feel they are a nation different to that of Spain and there is historical evidence that supports the feeling of a nation, and now they want their independence. That could be considered. But they don't, they claim in their declaration for independence historical facts that clearly distort obvious documented historical facts . And teach that Spain is the enemy creating a very hostile atmosphere. An atmosphere that never existed before and in historic terms is very recent. At the end of the day it comes down to politics and money, not patriotism. If it were patriotism there would be more evidence in history. Spain was established and a constitution was signed and agreed. Spain is indivisible.

One last comment, if history is not important to them , they are not patriotic. So what is the motivation? They honestly think that Catalonia will be better off on its own economically? Do they have any idea what to will cost the Catalan people to go independent?

simonharris said:
Wednesday, September 24, 2014 @ 12:48 PM

Whether Borrel II was a hero or not, the result was that he ceased the relationship of vassalage to the Franks so the territory he controlled became, for want of better words independent or sovereign, in that it owed no allegiance to any external power.

Admittedly, the Franks didn't recognise this for some time but the embryonic (yes, I know, not born yet) Caalonia pottered on quite happily anyway.

Name said:
Saturday, September 27, 2014 @ 10:33 PM

bapclav wrote:
"All these points could be made about Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia, C+ech republic, Slovak Republic, Serbia, Bosnia and, indeed, Portugal. ( There are many others.)

Does Oliver Hardy want them all to be given back to their previous "masters" - Putin, for instance ?"

What does this article have to do with Putin? What do the Czech Republic and Slovakia have to do with Putin? A very strange argument. While Latvia's and Estonia's independence as sovereign states with the government in Riga and Tallinn respectively can only be traced to the early 20th century, this is not true for the Lithuanians and the Czechs. All the above mentioned countries have different history of independence. You might want to read materials about the Grand Duchy of Lithuania (its political centre was in the present-day Lithuania, even though the duchy included large Slavic speaking areas), the Duchy of Bohemia. Not to mention the fact that the Czechs are not exactly German, even though they used to be incorporated into the Holy Roman Empire and later on the Astrian Empire.

Speaking of "masters", there are always more dominant powers, so for less influential countries it's just a question of which one you like better. Looks like you are perfectly fine with the United States being the "masters" of the Western world (for instance, read about France's BNP Paribas being criminally charged and fined for violating US sanctions against Sudan). And interestingly, secession is hardly possible in the US.

Jeremy Holland said:
Friday, November 7, 2014 @ 10:59 AM

Hi Thomas,

Interesting post. I wonder if you have read Kamen's book, ¨The Phoenix & the Flame"? It deals with Catalonia's role in the counter reformation.

I ask this because to me the fact that Catalonia never had a strong protestant strain is one of the reasons I am suspicious of its historical claims to be an independent nation. After all, before the advent of nationalism in the 19th century, many of the countries we recognize today came about because of their religious affiliations post reformation. Scotland for example had the Catholic Jacobites. Flanders was for Dutch speaking Catholics. Yet as far as I know Catalonia only tried to be more Catholic.

Also, an area of Spanish history that I don't hear enough about is the Peninsula War that occurred nearly a century after the War of Succession. From my understanding, the local Catalan militia, "the Miquelets", played a significant role in the defeat of the occupying French forces. It seems to me had the area felt no affinity for Spain, its people wouldn't have fought so valiantly to defend it.

Also a quick response to Daven and his comment: "Yes, you kill bulls by sport (high cultural level)".

Bull fighting is truly a cruel sport. But so is the "correbous", a Catalan tradition that sets bull's horns on fire while chasing the poor animals into the sea and is still celebrated there. So cruelty to animals for entertainment purposes, it seems, is not exclusive to Spaniards.

Pere said:
Monday, November 10, 2014 @ 12:41 PM

It's obvious that you have little idea about Catalan History and you have just read the Nationalist Spanish Version. Catalonia and Catalan Kingdom (who alsoe embraced half current Italy) was independent from IX till XV. From 1472 till 1714 was part of the Hispanic Monarchy as Portugal or Flanders were part of it. During this period of time we had different laws than Spaniards-Castillians and a National Parliament and our Constitutions. After the Succession War (Catalans-Dutch-English-Austrians against Spaniards-French) our language, Constitutions and National Parliament were abolished and since that day (300 years ago), since that defeat (manu militari, occupation) we're part of Spain...just a conquest of them.

Thomas Oliver said:
Monday, November 10, 2014 @ 1:25 PM

Thanks for commenting but the Catalan kingdom never existed. Catalonia has never been a kingdom, not even for one day. And any one who says that is just showing their lack of knowledge. It was the Crown Of Aragon which stretched out to half of Italy not the kingdom of Catalonia. Catalonia came under the Crown of Aragon. Yes they had their own laws and their own language eventually but that doesn't mean it was an independent country. I think you need to get your facts right before commenting. Clearly you have been influenced by someone who has no idea.

Catalonia's claim to independence can not be based on historic fact. But the new movement of a region which considers itself to be a nation and wishes to defend cultural differences and venture on into the future as an independent state for the first time, which is fine and legitimate as long as the law is fulfilled. Change the constitution and then hold a referendum with all of its consequences. But stop trying to convince the world that Catalonia has been under the tyrannic rule of the Spanish for 300 years, it is such rubbish and a total lie.

rsanchezlamoso said:
Monday, November 10, 2014 @ 4:42 PM

That is right Thomas. Catalonia was a region, part of the Kingdom of Aragón, even kids know this. Look how obvious Mr. Pere jumps and never mentions this basic fact, and that the kingdom of Aragón and Castille became together. This comment from Pere is the perfect example how not only Catalans fool themselves, but they use their "facts" to brain wash kids in school under the so called "programa de inmersión".

BTW. Let´s talk about the 9-N fiasco and the real results, because they are already fabricating facts again, even at the present time:
Population of Catalonia in 2010: 7.5 M
Allowed to vote (over 16 yrs. old): 6.5 M
Voters (in theory & without verification): 2.2 M
2.2 M / 6.5 M = 0.338 x 100 = 33.8%
80% of the voters (in theory) voted "YES": 33.8% x 0.8 = 27%
Results: 27% wants independent, a TOTAL failure, you can´t even make a joke with these results. But what is the catalan goverment doing, calling it a "success".

Please, can somebody tell these people to stop waisting somebody´s else time!! The amount of stupidity can´t be calculated!

Peter West said:
Tuesday, November 11, 2014 @ 5:30 AM

rsanchezlamoso : I won´t "waist" too much of your time :

The reason many Catalans did not vote was because they knew the results were not going to be accepted. If it had been an officially accepted vote, the turnout would have been much higher.

As for your silly calculations - on that basis, what % of Spaniards voted for Rajoy, or any previous prime minister. And I don´t recall anybody voting for Franco !

simonharris said:
Tuesday, November 11, 2014 @ 7:33 AM

Two points:

1. Why do you always go on about Catalonia never having been a kingdom? Plenty of internationally-recognised countries have never been kingdoms ... I deal with this period (9th-12th centuries) in depth in my book 'Catalonia Is Not Spain: A Historical Perspective'.

2. The vote in Sunday was an incredible success given the difficulty the Generalitat had in organising it. More than 2,350,000 in Catalonia alone travelled long distances and behaved with exemplary civism in order to democratically voice their opinions. What was also important was that by voting in an 'illegal' referendum the Catalans have been disobedient en masse for the first time ... this is just the start!

Thomas Oliver said:
Tuesday, November 11, 2014 @ 8:06 AM

Hi Simon
You say "plenty of Internationally-recognised countries have never been a kingdom" and you are absolutely right. But they never claimed to be a kingdom. Both you and I know that Catalonia was never a Kingdom so when Catalans use it in their argument for independence it discredits them greatly. As I said, one doesn't need 'history' to justify going independent, so why manipulate it? (that's not directed at you) It only creates a totally unnecessary anti-Spain sentiment.

As for the vote on Sunday, I think it was as expected, more to less the same amount of people came out on the streets as the previous 4 demonstrations. Not quite sure what difficulty they had in organising it? They knew from the very beginning what they were going to do and used civil servants and public building to to hold the voting. There was no intervention on behalf of the central government so I would say it went "sobre ruedas". Well done to them for expressing their opinion but it would be interesting to see what happens when the whole region eventually votes. In my personal opinion I think that the vast majority of the Catalans that actually wanted independence would have gone out and voted. I think the "illegality" of the vote would have been irrelevant to pro-independance" Catalans. It would have been far more relevant to anti-indpendance Catalans as they knew their vote wouldn't count for anything nor would it have been counted by a person who was randomly chosen. So I think those who are not in favor of independence would have stayed at home. It doesn't take away from the success of the day but I thought more people would have gone out and voted given the occasion it was. I think we could be seeing a limit here of the amount of people who actually want independence and it may not be enough…we'll see.

simonharris said:
Tuesday, November 11, 2014 @ 9:45 AM

1. After 25 years here and a lot of research for the book, I've never heard or read any reputable thinker (historian, politician, tv presenter etc) claim that Catalonia was ever a kingdom ... it wasn't! What people say in bars when they're drunk isn't to be taken seriously!!!

2. We're not taking about independence (yet) but rather the right to hold a legal vote (referendum/plebiscitary elections). I think it will probably turn out to be elections in February, which the pro-indie parties will. It will be followed by a unilateral declaration of independence ... Truth is, though, we won't know until a definitive vote takes place.

Thomas Oliver said:
Tuesday, November 11, 2014 @ 10:19 AM

The reason I commented on the kingdom point was no other than to answer Pere's comment :

"It's obvious that you have little idea about Catalan History and you have just read the Nationalist Spanish Version. Catalonia and Catalan Kingdom (who also embraced half current Italy) was independent from IX till XV"

As you say no "reputable thinker" would say Catalonia was a kingdom but unfortunately many people do believe it was…. as does Pere….

As for the poll :

"We're not taking about independence (yet) but rather the right to hold a legal vote (referendum/plebiscitary elections)" - come on Simon let's be honest here, no one really cares about "the right" to hold a legal vote….what they want is to have the opportunity to vote for independence full stop. Other wise the question on Sunday would have been " Do you think Catalonia should have a right to hold a legal vote?" and not "Do you think Catalonia should be an independent state?".
The vote will eventually come…. but patience they will need to change the constitution first and once changed give a time frame of at least a year I would imagine, so a unilateral declaration of independence after February is very unlikely, unless it is more pantomime, without having modified the constitution and without having had a real referendum with guarantees.

What happened on Sunday was a rehearsal or a match without a referee if you like (no offense intended). If it is not a legal vote it can never be fully trusted nor does it serve any purpose other than another demonstration and it will never draw all the population to the ballot boxes. Let them vote once and for all but a legal vote without disobeying the constitution or breaking the law. If a real vote was to come along I have a feeling many would think very carefully before ticking the yes box, as it did in Scotland. We'll have to wait and see. But one thing is for sure up until now it has been a one sided battle. If a real referendum were to come along you would very quickly see the Pro-Spain catalans wake up and take the stage and all the pro-Spain campaigns would be activated making that decision just a little bit harder…its easy to fight when the opponent doesn't hit back. And unless the situation is real the pro-spain Catalans won't move a finger. But that is just an opinion, we will have to wait and see.. however you might be lucky and they might do it as badly as Cameron did it and actually do them a favour! Time will tell.

simonharris said:
Tuesday, November 11, 2014 @ 12:29 PM

Pere is not an English speaker and the appropriate term would have been sovereign state.

Obviously most of the people that voted on Sunday wanted independence but nothing can be done without a legal democratic mandate. Furthermore, a proper debate on the pros and cons would be very healthy.

Roland Scales said:
Thursday, January 22, 2015 @ 4:00 PM

The Diada only dates from 1980? How very strange. I could have sworn that I was present at the mass rally for the Diada Nacional at Sant Boi de Llobregat in September 1976 along with some 100,000 Catalans.

Saul D said:
Thursday, February 12, 2015 @ 11:39 AM

The description has a sense of imposing modern viewpoints onto ancient history. Firstly, a county, unlike modern definitions, was an area ruled by a count. It could be dependent or independent (The Duchy of Luxembourg is an existing example of an independent non-kingdom). The County of Barcelona was de facto independent. However in feudal hierarchical it was better to be known as a king than a count, so when the leader of a powerful terroritory married into a monarchical system, he would chose to become the King of Aragon instead of the Count of Barcelona. (Not that being a kingdom, or previously independent should matter - Finland, The Netherlands, Belgium, the USA and many other countries became independent without having been kingdoms or independent in the past).

Secondly, Spain was, until the Bourbon takeover, a collection of separate kingdoms and territories sharing a monarch but each with separate governance, laws, taxes and even borders (think England and Ireland under the Stuarts). The idea of a nation state, and a nation identified with a single absolute monarch came in with the Bourbons after 1714 based on Louis XIV's France (the same absolutist ideas that led to Charles Stuart losing his head).

Until this point, administration of Spain was more like an managing empire of separate countries - Machiavelli commented on how skillfully Ferdinand was able to play off different local interests.

The King employed Councils (eg the Council of Aragon) for administration but those Councils hands were tied by local legal norms and constitutions (fueros) with each territory having its own identity, and being largely autonomous for day-to-day activities.

Unfortunately with a modern eye, there is a tendency to confuse the Personal Union of the monarchy as a national union of the state. A practical example of the separation were actual borders and custom posts between these countries.

The dispute of 1700-1714 with Catalonia also didn't emerge out of the blue. It's worth reading "The Revolt of the Catalans" by J.H.Eliott for a background into how the Spanish Monarchy governed, relationships between the Spanish regions and how this led to local frictions and demands for self determination (not just in Catalonia, but in Netherlands and Portugal which were also parts of the Spanish Empire).

dankmemez said:
Friday, February 19, 2021 @ 12:10 AM

lmao

peter west said:
Friday, February 19, 2021 @ 7:32 AM

dankmemez :What a pointless comment.