Talk:Fuero

message: I'm not clear on the current claims of the Basque Country (autonomous community) with respect to fueros, nor that of any other region except Navarre. Do any of the other Spanish regions count their present day autonomy as a fuero? -- Jmabel | Talk 00:48, Oct 21, 2004 (UTC)
:There is nothing at Basque Country (autonomous community) on fueros. I don't know if Castilian liberties were ever general Castilian fueros. Anyway, they would disappear after the Castilian War of the Communities. The Catalonian charters were suppressed after the Spanish War of Succession. As I wrote in the article, the four Diputaciones Forales were restored by the autonomy process. The Navarrese one is not subjected to the Basque government if that is not clear in my redaction. -- Error 01:05, 23 Oct 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Fueros de Castilla seems a law compilation. -- Error 01:51, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Current claims

message: Then, Would I procced to rewrite a little bit the second paragraph of the article, the one in dispute?
Perhapps it is enough erasing the first sentence and changing some adverb to explain the classical (actualy it has not relevance in actual laws) concept of Fuero as compendia of laws, uses and costumes that had evolved to writen law? 
Although it can also be left as it is now and add a sentence linked to the end of the article to show the other possible concept or meaning in Fuero.Idiazabal 14:38, 5 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Procced to change the second paragraph? 

message: Idiazabal: in the article, the following, which is yours, is enough of a mess that I don't know how to fix it. It includes your own first-person commentary, it doesn't set any context, etc. It's more like a talk-page comment than part of the article. I realize you have valid points here, but this needs a total rewrite.
Here's my suggestion: work out what you want to say here; maybe write it in Spanish, I'll be glad to translate, if I'm out of my depth anywhere it's obvious User:Error is at least close to dual native proficiency, we'll get the translation done. I want to get this into the article, I don't feel I have my head around it well enough to just write it from scratch myself, but this material is really not much help. -- Jmabel | Talk 08:47, Nov 9, 2004 (UTC)
:Note how in the forth document Archbishop LLorente denies the own Alfonso X's Fuero juzgo version to reinvent as Castilian some ancient fueros given by the Navarrese king. Of course the Castilian historiografy have worked in such way to rebuild a world in which all the legitimacy had to fall in the Castilian crown. As any part has made along history.
:I would say that the meaning of Fuero would be just the same of would be today "Right" in the sense of politic-juridical system, or constitution, magna carta, or any other name that means "rule of law".
:Of course the connotations of the meanings of words, and sometimes the negative connotations that political interest give to the words, have made so controversial the fueros as Basque institutional system. But it should be separate and foccus in the different would-means of the word Fuero, perhapps derived from the Goth system or from the Pyreenical laws system.
<end of quoted "problem" passage>
idiazabal answer:
Yes, it was as a talk page. I was a little bit radical there. I didn't found any other way. 
About the uncomprensibleness, I didn't know how to obtain English subjuntives. And now I would try to rewrite it:
:
:-----Those four documents are taken by an would-be Spanish encyclopedia that at the end started and ended with the four tomos dedicated to the Basque Provinces. Toledo Archbishop LLorente even denied the own Alfonso X's Seven Partidas (a compendium of Christian Iberian fueros made arround the 1220 year) or credited to the Castilian king many fueros first gave by the Navarrese. Certainly during the Godoy regime the Castilian historiography worked very hard to build a new Spanish order an a centralized and homogeneous state eliminating the differences among Castilean laws system and Basque fueros and Aragonese-Catalonian institutions (their fueros were suppressed also in 1717.) To accomplish such goal they started a considerable editorial effort exemplified in archbishop LLorente Noticias históricas de las tres provincias vascongadas.
:--------Anyway, the meaning of Fuero would be just the same of today idea of "Right" in its acception of juridicial and political system of rights, or constitution, magna carta or any other system of main laws. But in its beginnings it was a compendium of uses and costumes, natural law, hereditary laws, even pre-Christian divorce law (which was very disputed and tried to suppress in Navarrese fuero by the church, although unsuccessfuly .-refference taken from Origin and legal authority of FUERO GENERAL DE NAVARRA) and, most important, system of election of lord, king and limitative of the rights he would have along with the election of the representatives councils. 
:The fuero also was mean to be ruled under Roman and Gothic power, same by Basques, Vascons, Cantabrians and Astures. They were an oral transmited code of uses and costumes and effectively ruled through a system of conciliums (concejos or Basque batzarres) and representatives that applied such rule, although it didn't take its historicaly known forms until the first Romance language started to be writen moreless in the s.XI or XII. There existed previously writen Cartas puebla, but almost all of them have disappeared, along with other original fueros, due to wars and fires.
:---------The negative connotations of the word fueros started with the Godoy regime editorial effort directed to suppress the Basque provinces system and to bring the taxes and military borders to the Pyrenees. But it sharpened in 1824's short-lived constitutional Triennium and the subsequent Carlist War, in which the Basques aligned with the Carlist in a close deffense of their political and institutional system while the Catalonians did trying to reinstate there abolished 1717 ones. Anyway, that "editorial war" continued all along the s.XIX and part of the XX, although can be said that it is still Spain main internal debate even today in renewed forms centered in other words but with the same historic-political core.
:There is also the French school of doctrine that sustains that the fueros (Basque, Navarrese, Aragonese and Catalonian, both from the north or south side of the Pyrenees) were but the original Pyreneeal juridicial system, which in those cases is very close to reality. Being the high-Pyreneeal Hosca, main city of Sobrarbe County, the first of all writen fueros, then part of the Vascon kingdom of Navarre and ethnicaly Basque (there exist even a decree of the XVIII forbbiden the use of the Basque language in the market.)
<-----I don't know if my rewriting helps or obscures more the subject. Perhapps what you wanted was a commentary on the LLorente's books and I've lost in the way. Rewrite it at your wishes.Idiazabal 14:53, 9 Nov 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Part of this is still a mess 

message: "...invaded Aragon and executed its authorities." I assume this is "executed" in the sense of "killed", but who exactly was killed? -- Jmabel | Talk 05:55, Dec 15, 2004 (UTC)
:The Justicia Mayor (an ombudsman?) and others. --Error 02:40, 16 Dec 2004 (UTC)
replies: text:  How can King "invade" his own territory (Aragón)?--Bistor92 17:18, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Because effective ownership was not so clearcut. For a similar example, even historians who favor the North in the U.S. Civil War, and don't recognize the secession of the Southern states as legitimate, don't hesitate to refer in some contexts to the North "invading" the South. I'm sure it wouldn't be hard to come up with a lot of similar examples. - Jmabel | Talk 18:11, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Under the fueros of Aragón, the powers of the king were limited. In this case, he could not seize the Aragonese Antonio Pérez. So Phillip overruled the Aragonese government with Castilian troops, i.e., invaded Aragon. In Castile, since the War of the Communities, the royal power was less limited. --85.84.179.227 01:55, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unclear phrase 

message: Fuero Juzgo is not the Seven partidas (Siete Partidas)...  
The Fuero Juzgo (1241) is a translation to the spanish of the Liber Iudiciorum (visigoth text of 654) made during the government of Fernando III. 
The Seven Partidas (1256-1265) are of the time of the kingdom of Alfonso X 
--Yakoo 00:48, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Fuero Juzgo =! Seven Partidas

message: Biblioteca Nacional Española provides a digitized version of Amalio Marichalar, Marqués de Montesa, Historia de la legislación y recitaciones del derecho civil de España : Fueros de Navarra, Vizcaya, Guipúzcoa y Alava, 2ª ed. corr. y aum., Madrid : [s.n.], 1868 (Impr. de los Sres. Gasset, Loma y compañia) p. ; 8º mayr.
--Error 23:10, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added this as an external link. - Jmabel | Talk 05:07, 7 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: In the Biblioteca Nacional

message: this article only represents the Spanish view, we need the Portuguese counterpart, maybe because the article name is in Spanish we need to create the article "Foral", as in Portugal Foral are often the foundation/ autonomy of Municipalities. -Pedro 13:23, 14 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Foral redirects here, which, I believe, is as it should be. Information on Portugal would be welcome; I, for one, know little or nothing about historic Portuguese law, and :pt:Aforamento is little more than a stub. If you do, and/or know where to research it, certainly add something. -- Jmabel | Talk 00:48, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

text: The main question concerning the mixing of the portuguese Foral and the spanish Fuero is that, whereas fuero is a very controversial topic dealing with the past and present statutes of the regions of iberia under spanish administration (i'm trying to be completely diplomatic...) the word Foral is, in modern portuguese, almost exclusivelly used to describe the bill of rights that was conceded by the ruling portuguese king to a given village, confering it the statute of city. This clarification seems worthy of a different arcticle... --Pedrojpinto 23:29, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  That sense of fuero is mentioned here already, and would do well to be expanded upon. Unsurprisingly, focusing in a Spanish context, that didn't get as much attention, but it is part of the story for Spain, as for Portugal. I'd still say expand on it here if you know enough to do so. - Jmabel | Talk 01:56, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Spanish use

message: I recently edited the part where it was stated that biscayne hidalgos didn't refuse manual works unlike their fellow Spanish hidalgos just by stating that they obviously couldn't refuse manual work since every Biscayne was born hidalgo and they just couldn't have avoided manual works unless they wanted the whole province to be idle, whereas in the rest of Spain not everyone was born hidalgo which allowed those who did born hidalgo to refuse manual work (for someone else would do it). I've seen this edit reverted because it is obvious, and I do agree. I have now erased the cross reference between Biscaynes not refusing manual works and the rest refusing them because, lacking the obvious reference which has been deleted, some may be misled to think of some kind of supposed humbleness within Biscayne hidalgos confronted to some supposed lazyness of the rest of Spanish hidalgos which, due to the above mentioned fact that all Biscayne born hidalgos, is not true.
At the same time I have erased the following line which stated "some resented the formation of a Biscayne clique" because it just doesn't fit well in there and, besides, it is too vague and doesn't add anything in this context. Thanks
Mountolive 22:23, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Obvious

message: :Navarrese law developed along less feudal lines than those of surrounding countries.
I was under the impression that Navarre and Catalonia were more feudal than say Castile.
Castile as frontier land had many free men.
--Error 23:06, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree with Error.Mountolive 23:11, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Feudalism

message: The remarks about Alavese foralismo sit very oddly in the article. I notice that the mention of Unidad Alavesa was dropped, apparently on the basis that the party was merged into the PP. So what? This is an encyclopedia, not a newspaper. Either this article needs to expand on the matter enough to make it coherent, or it needs to link to one that does. - Jmabel | Talk 22:37, 14 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Álava 

message: I have added a  tag. The main fault is that the lead section is far too long, but the rest of the article also needs to be organised into logically coherent sections. I think that's a job best left to the subject experts (not me). Good luck!--NSH001 12:42, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  cleanup 

message: The Guadalajara article says it received its fuero from Alfonso VII (in the section Christian conquest and Middle Ages.) I decided to be bold and add an entry here in the List of aristocratic fueros, but I'm not completely certain that it qualifies. Is that list supposed to be non-royal fueros to be shown in contrast with royal ones, or not? --Eliyahu S Talk 05:35, 13 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fuero for [[Guadalajara, Spain|Guadalajara]] 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 3 external links on Fuero. 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/20131112002250/http://www.eusko-ikaskuntza.org/es/publicaciones/colecciones/riev/publicacion.php?o=1273 to http://www.eusko-ikaskuntza.org/es/publicaciones/colecciones/riev/publicacion.php?o=1273
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070210180317/http://www.euskadi.net/q56/q56ControladorServlet?mapping=detalleMonografia.do&accion=2&idObjeto=2105350&idLibro=09600009808 to http://www.euskadi.net/q56/q56ControladorServlet?mapping=detalleMonografia.do&accion=2&idObjeto=2105350&idLibro=09600009808
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927012137/http://www.bne.es/cgi-bin/wsirtex?FOR=WBNBIBT1&VIS=W01BIMO&FMT=WBNARIA&ITE=0004701272289 to http://www.bne.es/cgi-bin/wsirtex?FOR=WBNBIBT1&VIS=W01BIMO&FMT=WBNARIA&ITE=0004701272289
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) 05:43, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified