Talk:Richard Amerike

message: Iceland has never had a king, at least of its own, although it has at times been ruled by other countries that had kings.  If we're talking about something that supposedly happened in the late 1400s, that would been while Iceland was under the rule of the Kalmar Union.  The Danish established a trade monopoly in Iceland but that wasn't until the early 1600s. 213.176.153.100 (talk) 11:29, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Seems to have been about the King of Denmark and the cod trade, but Hudd said nothing about that. I hope I've fixed the issue.  Doug Weller talk 13:28, 12 February 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  "King of Iceland" 

message: "Derivation of "America" from Amerike, the sponsor of the discovery of Newfoundland is etymologically easier than from "Amerigo Vespucci," the map-maker, since the Latinized version of the name is Amerigus Vespucius and Ameriga is the feminized version." 
This is incorrect. Americus is the standard Latin form of Amerigo. It's originally from a Gothic/Lombard name Amaric, but, that aside, Latin documents routinely refer to him as Americus Vesputius or Vespucius.
See "Vita e lettere di Amerigo Vespucci" (1745) http://books.google.com/books?id=nFYUAAAAQAAJ&pg=PR73&lpg=PR73&dq=americus+nomine&source=bl&ots=NUZ19ywy3g&sig=seMxTjd7BDcfUM9dmfC_f8xisVU&hl=en&ei=mYM1SvPSE6G8swPKnoTtBg&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6#PPP8,M1
There's also an extant letter of Anselm (1093), among others, which refers to an "Americus de Bucco" (http://www.itinerarimedievali.unipr.it/v2/pdf/M_mariotti_universita_parma.pdf) It was a moderately common Latin name, and other instances are easily found by anyone motivated to look.
I am deleting this claim from the article until a reliable reference can be cited that proves otherwise. Tarchon (talk) 23:41, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Latin form of Amerigo 

message: Américo Vespucio.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.8.98.118 (talk) 12:27, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Spanish form

message: "Martin Waldseemüller ... published a world map in 1507 using Vespucci's previously published letters. The theory suggests that Waldseemüller assumed that the "America" that Vespucci used was derived from his first name. Waldseemüller provided an explanation of this assumption as an attachment to the map."
#I think the current majority view is that the letters were attributed to Vespucci but probably written by other(s) and including material from Vespucci's actual letters mixed with invented material - isn't it?
#Did the letters attributed to Vespucci use "America" for the land? I didn't think they did.
#"The theory suggests that Waldseemüller assumed ..." seems at odds with "Waldseemüller provided an explanation of this assumption". Did he make and explain an assumption or is it only theorised that he made the assumption?
Nurg 09:51, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Waldseemüller & Vespucci query 

message: I removed a couple of the more speculative sections, specifically the bit about countries only being named after people's last names to support the Amerike theory. I also removed the Coat of Arms section as it seemed to have some pseudohistorical red flags. Even if it could be sourced, I don't see that would worthy of inclusion. What is left can possibly be sourced; however the lead needs to stress more that this theory is a fringe one, and the body needs a paragraph denoting the support of the Vespucci theory. Has there been any historical criticism by a RS on this theory? That would be most helpful. Auntie E. (talk) 17:44, 12 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I have yet to find any sources that fit this criteria.  Google scholar returns only 16 hits, none of which appear especially helpful.  This appears to be about an extremely fringe view, and needs to be presented as such. However, Amerike is a notable historical figure, as a financial backer of Cabot's expeditions. Cheers, ClovisPt (talk) 19:43, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I completely agree. Unfortunately this has crept into various other WP articles as well (Americas and Amerigo Vespucci.--Kmhkmh (talk) 10:42, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: Independent of what one might think of the claim that America was named after Amerike, it's description here needs to use reputable/reliable sources and the 3 current references used here, don't really qualify as that:
*John Davies is a reputable historian, but the cited paper is a bit a "welsh patriot piece" (so not taken too seriously in any aspect) and the naming issue is just mention in an enumeration without any reasoning or evidence whatsoever. 
*The Xenophobe Guide to Welsh just mentions it as (patriotic) welsh claim (not as a fact or a serious theory) and is not the best source anyhow. 
*MacDonald BBC article has a similar problem like John Davies, the claim is just mentioned in one line without any reasoning or evidence and the rest of the articles deals with other stuff.
--Kmhkmh (talk) 10:38, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: reputable sources

message: The correct Welsh spelling of Amerike would in fact be Ap Meurig. As Richard Amerike was an Englisman of Welsh descent - it is perfectly feasible for his name to be spelt Amerike or Apmerig or Apmerik or Amerik or... well just any about conceivable variation. You can look at anglicised names like Bowen (From Ap Owen) or Parry from (Ap Harry) as evidence of the fluidity of the 'rules' of transilliteration.
It is extremely unlikely that he used the Welsh Rhisiart or Rhysiart as the English spelling of Richard has long been dominant in Wales.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.5.211.22 (talk) 00:34, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Welsh names note 

message: Except for The Book of General Ignorance, which I doubt qualifies as a reliable source, the entire section named "Theory of the naming of America" does not cite any sources for the claim that America was named after Amerike. --Saddhiyama (talk) 22:50, 20 November 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree (see my comment further up), the article still lacks proper sources. All we have is essentially a "urban myth" or speculation, without any serious academic backing at all.--Kmhkmh (talk) 00:54, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Since it was completely unsourced and irrelevant to the subject I deleted everything in the section except for the Hudd bit. However that is also still unsourced and at the very least should be reworded to show its fringeness, if not outright deleted as well (I wouldn't object to the last option). --Saddhiyama (talk) 09:01, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dubious section 

message: The following has been removed from the lede: 
 
I was unable to find any source to support that this story is an "urban myth". – PIE ( CLIMAX )  15:37, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Good idea. Not sure you introduced the urban myth part, though it might have been partially my fault is I use the term term in quotes on the discussion page. It is definitely not an urban myth in the strict sense, since theory is clearly attributed to Hudd. It only shares one typical feature of urban myths namely (most likely) not being true.--Kmhkmh (talk) 17:31, 17 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Fringe theory is probably a more apt description of it. --Saddhiyama (talk) 09:41, 22 November 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Even nearer the mark would be historical revisionism.  I subbed that into the above sentence and returned it to the lede. – PIE ( CLIMAX )  07:37, 3 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Urban myth?  

message: Maybe there should be an article on the naming of America(s) which can weigh up the different theories, instead of this one.  As noted above, this article is mostly about the theories, not about Amerike.--Jack Upland (talk) 07:05, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact, Amerike is so insignificant he is not in the articles on John Cabot or the Matthew.--Jack Upland (talk) 01:07, 8 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: There being no objections, I have now created a new article Naming of America. I propose that this article be merged to that one.--Jack Upland (talk) 01:03, 13 February 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: , you are the only one in the past six months who has raised any objections to the merger in your comments below. Yes, Caracticus Saxon has added to the article. But still what we have is four shortish paragraphs of biographical material, much of which is sketchy or trivial. The bulk of the article is about Cabot and the naming of America. This article has been tagged with multiple issues since 2009. I first raised the issue of a merge back in 2014. I think the lack of discussion shows a lack of interest in the article. I still believe the merger should go ahead. I would propose keeping the biographical material as it is only brief and the Naming of the Americas article isn't long. What do you think?--Jack Upland (talk) 05:57, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
replies: text:  ok, you feel strongly about it, go ahead. Doug Weller talk 17:45, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

text: Since there's no consensus for a merger, I think the two articles should go back to what they were before.--Jack Upland (talk) 00:12, 16 September 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Naming of America(s) Article? 

message: This is partly by way of explanation for recent edits. Amerike was an interesting character.  There is limited verifiable biographical material on Amerike in print/on-line but rather more in raw form in archives -  which under 'original research' rules can't be cited either by way of detail or verification.  Sounds lame but true - one example is that Amerike's wife really was called Lucy, although published works don't cite a source.  It has proved possible to add a few more referenced 'notable facts and dates' to flesh out Amerike's biography.  The unreferenced dates of official appointments which I've recently added by way of correction to previous versions (March 2016) come from (printed) primary sources - but a more accessible source should be available shortly: not, alas, a biography of Amerike.  The difficulty of writing on Amerike, as several have noticed, is the the blurring of his biography with arguments for the naming of America;  to which should be added as an issue some of the relatively recent theories concerning his role in the Cabot expeditions.  Both have raised Amerike's public profile, and may well continue to do so - presumably why the article was written in the first place.  But whereas some modern popular writers that explore Amerike have been scrupulous in identifying their reading, other have been less careful, giving no source references at all. In consequence, a number of 'new facts' appear to be unverifiable - and one in particular (the story of the logs for the building of the Matthew) I've deleted.  Caracticus Saxon (talk) 22:31, 14 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: Please take note that I am proposing a merging this article to Naming of the Americas. This will go ahead if there are no objections.--Jack Upland (talk) 05:59, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I think I'll have to object to this now that User:Caracticus Saxon has started work on biographical material. Doug Weller talk 14:11, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: We'll see. In any case, the explanation of the naming theory only needs to be brief here.--Jack Upland (talk) 06:12, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: And an apology to users and adminstrators - I didn't quite understand the 'minor edit' etiquette - obviously some of my interventions were not minor, but resulted in substantial changes.  Where I merely reformatted (eg italics and typos) the 'summary' should reveal that.  I'm learning, and apologise for any inconvenience so caused.Caracticus Saxon (talk) 14:39, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

text: No apologies necessary. I agree that we can have a short version of the naming theory. Doug Weller talk 17:19, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: "Earls of Gwent" : Gwent was a kingdom not an earldom and I have therefore  deleted this phrase.Caracticus Saxon (talk) 16:16, 19 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Biographical material 

message: One unreferenced late twentieth century biographical note (cited several times in the article) states that Amerike lived for a while at West Camel, Somerset.  Although this claim has spread, it seems dubious.  The likely base source is a late sixteenth century genealogy of a genuine 'Merrick' family of West Camel.  They claimed descent from one Robert Merick of Taunton, d. c. 1568, son of Robert Merick of Taunton, son of an unknown Merick of Merricks Court, Herefs.  There's no mention of Richard, and the first West Camel 'Merrick' connection is at least thirty years after Richard's death. (Source: F. Weaver, The Visitations of the County of Somerset (1551, 1573, and 1591) (Exeter, 1885).  The Merrick genealogy is from 1591. I've taken the reference out of the main article, but left the trace here for anyone to find.Caracticus Saxon (talk) 22:12, 23 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  West Camel 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Richard Amerike. 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/20110720053102/http://www.umc.sunysb.edu/surgery/broome.html to http://www.umc.sunysb.edu/surgery/broome.html
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) 23:06, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified