Talk:Pelagius of Asturias

message: On what basis are you reverting my edits as not needed? The purpose of all infoboxes is to provide information at a glance something that this infobox does. Now, given that there are plenty of Saxon, Viking - hell, any pre-10th century - kings with the same infobox, how do you justify reverting my edits other than for the reason that "you" don't like it. 79.72.64.0 (talk) 11:01, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: The question is, is the purpose of Wikipedia "to provide information at a glance"? I say no. So I revert your edits as not building the encyclopedia. It is the purpose of the lead paragraph to give the essentials of a subject. The infobox is a worthless distraction. It adds nothing to the article, only repeats information already mentioned in the text, and that the least important about Pelagius! Srnec (talk) 23:00, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text:  Would you care to explain then why all the other articles have them?
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOS:INFOBOX
* http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Infobox  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.72.216.25 (talk) 09:28, 18 March 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Most articles have them because of people who have nothing to add but want to do something anyway. Srnec (talk) 23:08, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Infobox

message: A page was just deleted which claimed that the lords of Tagle owed their possession of their family holdings to a descent from Iñiga, daughter of Pelayo, who married a knight named Sancho and who was granted lands in the mountains of Santander by his father-in-law.  There are several problems with this. 1) Pelayo only has one documented daughter, Ermesenda, wife of Alfonso I. 2) Iñiga is a Basque name, and is not found in the Visigoth rump that was Asturias until the early 10th century (the first example of which I am aware, in the variant form Oneca/Onega, wife of count Diego Fernandez and mother of Mumadona Dias). 3) The name Sancho is likewise Basque, and all occurrences of which I am aware postdate the marriages of the kings of Leon to the daughters of Sancho I of Navarre. None of these Basque names are found in the west before the first Basque royal marriage, that of Alfonso III.  4) There are no records of men of lesser status during the reign of Pelayo, except for Pedro of Cantabria and his sons.  The names of no mere knight survives. 5) It is uncertain what precise lands Pelayo controlled. That Pelayo even had the ability to grant the future Tagle lands cannot be shown based on our scant knowledge. 6) Even were all this to be the case, evidence doesn't survive that would allow a family holding lands in the 12th century to be proven to have been holding it 400 years before.  There are no non-royal families that can be traced in the scant surviving documentation prior to the late 9th century, and their failure to use patronymics does not enable those who appear to be connected genealogically.  Only the most prominent non-royals appear in the earliest chronicles that provide all our information for the earliest years of the kingdom, no minor landholders appear.  In summary, this is a family legend invented to give them royal origins and ancient landholdings.  There was no Iñiga, there was no Sancho, the Tagles cannot trace to within 400 years of the reign of Pelayo. Agricolae (talk) 17:22, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  claimed daughter Iñiga - the page was deleted and with it the refutation, but it may crop up again  

message: The poet Robert Southey wrote an epic poem titled "Roderick the Last of the Goths" (1814), which deals (in poetically fictional form) with Pelagius (under the name Pelayo). The poem remains one of Southey's most acclaimed works, and played a strong role in the way the 19th century viewed the early Reconquista. Possibly this merits a mention in this article? Peterravn (talk) 16:05, 3 July 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Southey's poem "Roderick the Last of the Goths" 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Pelagius of Asturias. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070610013709/http://www.cervantesvirtual.com/historia/textos/medieval/alta_edad_media3.shtml to http://www.cervantesvirtual.com/historia/textos/medieval/alta_edad_media3.shtml
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110815092213/http://e-spacio.uned.es/fez/eserv.php?pid=bibliuned%3AETFSerie2-84925883-9B9F-C675-7D90-5C517B7AA520&dsID=PDF to http://e-spacio.uned.es/fez/eserv.php?pid=bibliuned:ETFSerie2-84925883-9B9F-C675-7D90-5C517B7AA520&dsID=PDF
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:20, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The reference I put is pretty reliable, it comes from a pretty large Spanish newspaper, specifically, that newspaper operates in Asturias. It talks about a revision on the creation of the kingdom of Asturias due to new archaeological finds. So it is pretty reliable. The fact that you may not understand it is a different issue. Translate it.
Also, leave the infobox where it is, there is nothing wrong with it. That you don't like infoboxes for some reason is not a reason not to have it.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brother Jerome (talk • contribs) 23:23, 8 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: And here I thought the "previous political administration" referred to was the Visigoths! The sentence was doubly misleading, since it doesn't make clear what previous gov't is referred to and the sources does not say "previous political administration"—"groups of power linked to the Roman era" is quite a different thing. In any case, that article does not mention Pelagius. Srnec (talk) 02:22, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Previous political administration. 

message: Is there a contradiction between "Visigothic" and "Asturian"? Could he not have been a Visigoth from Asturias? The lead does not say that he was from Toledo. His father was Fafila, his son was Fafila and his daughter was Ermosinda. This sounds pretty Visigothic.
 In your edit summary you say, . To what are you referring? Are not the earliest narrative accounts of Pelagius' life and deeds the chronicles of Albelda and Alfonso III, written about a century and a half after his death? There are no earlier Arabic sources. Srnec (talk) 23:47, 22 November 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: It has been suggested (can't cite a source, as it has been many years since I read this stuff) that there was an effort in the chronicle of Alfonso III to recast the self-image and foundation legend of the small Asturian kingdom: that it was only at that time that this local minor landholder who through a quirk of geography and intra-Muslim rivalries managed not to be overrun would be transformed into a scion and inheritor of the Visigothic royalty, with the Asturian kingdom really representing a continuation of the Visigothic realm under the same royal family, just with somewhat less territory under its control.  So, the difference between Pelayo being a Visigoth from asturias, or simply a visigoth from Asturias. Agricolae (talk) 03:42, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Visigothic or Asturian?