Talk:Amadís de Gaula

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:Amadis de Gaula)

Merge request[edit]

I'd do it myself if I had the time and expertise — the merge is not entirely trivial, as this stub does have some elements which don't appear in the main article (notably the Lion epithet) and would need to be fact-checked and categorised here. -- Perey 15:38, 19 July 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I speak Spanish:

The sources used by the articles in Liceus mentioned, are: 1.Amadís de Gaula I & II Edición de Juan Manuel Cacho Blecua Cátedra Letras Hispánicas. 2. Amadís de Gaula Anónimo Losada S.A. Buenos Aires 3. Diario de Leon 17 de Febrero 2008 Entrevista a Margarita Torres Sevilla Biógrafa de Enrique de Castilla. (This is an intervew with the biographer of Henry of Castile, Margarita Torres, professor at the University of Leon.) 4. Peter Herde Die Schlacht bei Tagliacozzo Bayerische Staatsbibliothek. -(This is a most brilliant study of the Battle of Tagliacozzo, with e description of the character of Henry of Castille, and his ability as a writer and warrior.) 5. Le Morte d'Arthur Sir Thomas Malory Signet Classic 6. Encyclopaedia Britanica 7. Libro de Buen Amor Arcipreste de Hita Colección Austral Espasa Calpe. 7. Many other sources in Spanish, English, German and French.

I believe you have done a perfectly fine job. As you can see in Wikipedia, there are two more articles in Liceus mentioned, perhaps you could make them accesible as well. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.100.46.66 (talk) 13:16, 14 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Author[edit]

Shouldn't it say "Anonymous" as the author? (Antonio.sierra 20:40, 29 April 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Infante Enrique of Castile as putative author?[edit]

Shouldn't be made the following statent without any explanation: "A Portuguese origin is most widely accepted but Amadís has also been claimed by the Spanish, French and Italians" Nowadays that only fact available as far we can investigate, are the Castillian editions as the oldest, so assuring the Protuguese origin when there is no one portuguese old edition or any data is demagogic. It is also to be considered the low difussion of the work in Portugal. Please that statement should be deleted. I.I.A. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.16.151.95 (talk) 12:15, 31 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An anonymous editor (or possibly more than one, but from very similar IP addresses) has recently made several edits suggesting that Infante Enrique of Castile (link added by me) was the original author of Amadis. The references he added in support of this thesis were not presented in a form that made it easy to find the articles concerned.

I have now converted the references to the two articles I could find into external links - my Spanish is next to non-existent but, so far as I can tell, while the text added does seem to summarise the articles, the articles themselves seem to have no quoted sources. Could someone with more Spanish than I have please evaluate the articles and determine whether the statements made are verifiable? PWilkinson (talk) 19:46, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir, you can verify the statements made in the articles by reading Infante Enrique of Castile in Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.100.46.20 (talk) 16:21, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to me that too much space is given to Santiago Sevilla's theory and articles in the Amadis article at this time. It would be helpful if Mr. Sevilla's institutional affiliation and rank was given, and if the requirements for inclusion/publication on the Liceus El Portal de las Humanidades website were explained here on the talk page (are articles peer-reviewed?). Until such time as the theory is more fully discussed in academic and peer-reviewed publications by specialists, its inclusion in this article seems premature, and (following Wikipedia:Verifiability) it may be necessary to move the passage to the talk page. - NYArtsnWords (talk) 18:11, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sir, as you have kindly mentioned me, I take the liberty to inform you about my rank: I have studied philosophy, economics, history of art, international law at Zurich University in Switzerlad. I have been professor at SEK University in Quito Ecuador. I was Alternate Executive Director of the International Monetary Fund in Washington. I was Minister of Finance of Ecuador 1975-1978. I was teacher of History at Academis Militar Ecuador. I am simoultaneus translator in three languages English, Spanish and German. After retiring from politics and banking, I have written a number of historical plays, in Spanish: Alejandro Magno; Julio César y Cleopatra, Juliano el Apóstata; El Rey Don Pedro el Cruel; Don Álvaro de Luna; Juana la Beltraneja; Juana la Loca; Cesare Borgia; Tenochtitlan o la Conquista de Mexico; Cajamarca y La Leyenda Negra; Don Manuel de Godoy Príncipe de la Paz.In English: King Peter the Cruel; Dracula and the Bloody Mary. In German: König Peter der Grausame; Julian der Abtrünnige. I have translated twelve Sonnets of William Shakespeare into twelve sonnets in Spanish. I have worked for quite some time into the authorship of Amadis de Gaula, and have published seven articles approaching the attribution of this famous work of the XIII century, supported by a number of medieval experts through Jorge Maiz Chacón. Most recently I have published a documented article in Liceus.com entitled:Redescubriendo al Amadís de Gaula del Siglo XIII where I detail the events that inspired Henry of Castille to write certain chapters of "Amadis". The literary establishment has not opposed my views. Wikipedia is a unique forum for discussing this matter. I have taken my name out of the main article on Amadis de Gaula, but I hope that the issue of its authorship will be kept. Otherwise stagnation of knowledge will perpetuate. Santiago sevilla (talk) 16:25, 10 June 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.100.46.94 (talk) 20:16, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Sirs, Once the authorship of Amadis has been attributed to Henry of Castile, there are some very interesting indications about the Geography and certain characters of the book: It seems plausible that Norgales is in fact North Wales ruled by Llyvelyn up Gruffyd Prince of Wales; Gaul is France under king Louis the Saint, Insula Firme is in fact Naples, Mongaça is Sicily, the Island of the Boiling Lake is Pantelleria where there is an underwater volcano or the isle of Ferdinandea, the princess Madasima is the Daughter of king Manfred of Sicily, Constance, married to King Peter III the Great of Aragon, who would be Galvanes. There are some other clear hints of Brian de Monjaste being Henry of Castille, such as him to say to king Lisuarte, or Edward I, that Brian is, (like Henry of Castile was), a descendant of the Platagenet dynasty, at the end of the Second Book of Amadis, translated by Place and Behm, page 671: ..." I did not leave you, because I never was your man, although I am of your lineage; ...". It also appears that the Castle of the Boiling Lake is in fact the Castle of Sciacca in Sicily attacked by a Spanish fleet in 1267, forces supporting Conradin against Charles d'Anjou, with Henry of Castile among the attackers, with support of Al Mustansir Sultan of Tunis. This event appears on page 966 of the Third Book of Amadis de Gaula edited by Juan Manuel Cacho Blecua. This notable coincidences should strengthen the possible authorship of Amadis by Henry of Castile. Santiago sevilla (talk) 23:02, 1 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.100.46.222 (talk) 14:57, 10 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding the Portuguese authorship of Amadis, some caveats should be introduced in the article: The style of the Castilian language in the folios at the University of California Berkeley, which are dated around 1420,is much older, and can be placed by the times of Don Juan Manuel (1282-1349). So the Portuguese authorship by Vasco de Lobeira at around 1385 must be reinterpreted as a translation from Castilian Spanish into Portuguese. This work was preserved in Lisbon in the archives of the Dukes of Aveiro, and this manuscript was finaly destroyed under an earthquake in 1755. It is crucial to establish that this was a translation, and not the first Amadis de Gaula, which was written in Castilian Spanish, most probably by Henry of Castile, who was alife and well until 1304, by the times of is nepew Don Juan Manuel. According to Alonso Lopes Vieira, author of "O romance de Amadis" there was a manuscript of "Amadis" in Portugal by the times of King Diniz. he states: "A suposta radacçao primitiva, do tempo de D.Alfonso III e seu filio D. Dinis, nunca foi stampada, nem se conservou manuscrita." Henry of Castile visited King Dinis in the year 1295 to negociate the peace with Infante Don Juan of Castile and Leon, in name of King Ferdinand IV of Castile. King Diniz was his grand-nephew, and also a famous trouvadour. On this occasion Henry handed over the Castilian manuscript of Amadis to King Diniz. This explains how Portugal got the novel from its author.Santiago sevilla (talk) 12:48, 25 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

THE FOURTH BOOK[edit]

Why did de Montalvo have to write a fourth book? Is it possible that he was forced to replace a volume that had largely rotted away with the passage of time? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.246.162.137 (talk) 22:54, 13 January 2009 (UTC) This is a very important question. Garci Rodríguez de Montalvo plagiarized the first three books of Amadis. He did not change much in it. The style is brilliant and the facts rather real. The fourth book has a different style, dull, lengthy and moralizing. It appears to be a novel by Garcí, not by the most probable author, Henry of Castile.The next question worth wondering about is: Why Garci Rodriguez de Montalvo made disappear the original book he used for his forgery? Famous Antonio Rodriguez Moñino, the linguist, discovered a few pages of the original Amadis now in possession of the University of California. Perhaps the whole original novel is now hidden somewhere in Spain, Medina del Campo, or Tordesillas. If we accept the authorship by Enrique de Castilla, there is a great potential for discovery of new facts about the Amadis. Just an example: The Battle of Cadfan fought in 1257 between English and Welsh forces, when Henry of Castile was in Bristol with prince Edward Plantagenet, appears in page 310 of the first book of Amadis (Edition of J.M. Cacho Blecua) with an almost equal name of Galfan and the same tactical events of the battle. Who else could have written this part of the novel, if not Henry of Castile? Furthermore, a recent study of El Libro de las Armas by Henry's nephew, Don Juan Manuel, has given us the inspiration for Amadis' crucial event, the hindered marriage with Oriana. In this famous book of Juan Manuel the hindered marriage of Henry of Castile with Infanta Constanza de Aragon is narrated in full detail. This "non-event" happened 1260, when the king of Aragon Don Jaimes agreed to the marriage to Constanza, proposed by Henry, only after Henry had conquered the moorish kingdom of Niebla and was entitled to be crowned king. His brother king Alfonso X of Castile and his consort Violante of Aragon opposed the marriage, invaded Niebla with the Castilian army and demanded the king of Aragon to marry Constanza instead with another brother of Henry and Alfonso, namely Don Manuel de Castilla, and obtained the acceptance of the king of Aragon. So Henry was set aside in anger. Henry of Castille jousted in single combat against the commander of Alfonso's army, Don Nuño González de Lara, wounded him in the face, defeated him, and obtained free passage. He and a small army of knights rode through Extremadura, sacking the country in vengeance for the offence suffered. He went on from Cadiz to Tunis with his warlike companions as soldiers of fortune. (See Memorias de D. Fernando IV de Castilla) This event is reflected in the "Amadis". I published a study on this matter "Inspiración del Amadís: Dolor de un Amor Perdido" in Scribd.Santiago sevilla (talk) 14:20, 25 February 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.100.46.118 (talk) 11:56, 16 February 2009 (UTC) There are a number of references to Scotland and Norway in the Amadis, which should be studied in connection with the assumption that Henry of Castile is the author of the novel. Henry of Castile probably met Alexander III King of Scotland and his wife Margaret of England, and knew about the naval war against Norway, and about their granddaughter the Maid of Norway, when in the court of Henry III between 1254 and 1259, and later, when imprisoned in Naples until 1292. He is the only Spanish nobleman to have this link to the historical facts alluded to in the Amadis, and to be recognized as a writer and poet. Please take account of the brilliant study by Prof. Valeria Bertolucci Pizzorusso Don Enrique/ Don Arrigo: un infante di Castiglia tra storia e letteratura Università di Pisa in Alcanate Revista de Estudios Alfonsíes 2004-2005 El Puerto de Santa María SpainSantiago sevilla (talk) 14:20, 25 February 2009 (UTC) A most coplete source of historical evidence regarding the life and times of Henry of Castile, in my view the author od "Amadis", can be found in The lives of the Popes in the early Middle Ages [[1]] His charismatic personality is well pictured,and also is heroic battling, much in line with his writing in Amadis the Gaula.Santiago sevilla (talk) 13:36, 7 May 2009 (UTC) The concept of plagiarism did not exist at the time. It was praiseworthy to "plagiarize".deisenbe (talk) 21:53, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

English translations[edit]

Is there any information about what English translations are available and what, if any, the differences are between them? ARE there any English translations out there?(216.15.62.119 (talk) 03:00, 27 March 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Yes Sir,there is an excellent translation entitled Amadis of Gaul Books I and II, translated by Edwin Place and Herbert Behm; John E. Keller is the editor. The University Press of Kentucky. I got it through Amazon. Books 3 and 4 have recently also been published by the same translators.Santiago sevilla (talk) 16:36, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Another source is Amadis of Gaul blogspot, where you can read a chapter newly translated from the original Spanish by Sue Burke each Tuesday, and a commentary on the work or its environment by her or a guest writer each Thursday. It is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. When finished, Burke plans to leave her translation up and to seek a professional publisher. The latest posted as of this date, with readers' comments and links to all preceding chapters and commentaries, is Chapter 18 (first half). Pawyilee (talk) 14:12, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Allegorical style[edit]

How can "the use of the present participle... bring Amadís into line with the allegorical style of the 15th century"? And might the reader have references to scholarship mentioned in passing?--Wetman (talk) 14:21, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The "Gaula" in "Amadis de Gaula" is Wales, not Gaul.[edit]

Contributors to this article do not seem to realize that the "Gaula" in the title of "Amadis de Gaula" is actually meant to signify Wales and not ancient Gaul. Note in Spanish the similarity of the names "Gaula" and "Gales" (Wales) and how distinct they are from Spanish for Gaul namely "Gália". In any case Amadis takes place in (a legendary, pseudo-Celtic version of) the British Isles so there is no doubt about this. Therefore everything in the article that connects the "Gaula" of Amadis to ancient Gaul, i.e. the geographical area today known as France, notably the purported translation of the title and the blue links, is wrong. Contact Basemetal here 04:44, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, at least in the French and Italian traditions (and, probably, by extension, the English translations), "Gaula" was clearly understood as "Gaul" and not as "Wales". In Bernardo Tasso's poetic translation into Italian (1560), he is referred to as "Amadigi di Francia" (Canto X, Stanza 51, "Amadigi di Francia fu nomato"). In the 1540 French translation by Herberay des Essarts, when King Perion "de Gaule" returns to his own lands (after visiting King Garinter "de la Petite Bretaigne", i.e. Britanny), he consults his men about a dream he's had, and these men include Ungan "le Picard" and Albert "de Campaigne" (Book I, Chapter III; edition by Yves Giraud, Paris: STFM, 1986, p.23.); later, we find his other vassals include Gallin/Galain "duc de Normandie" (p.93, 98); and in a later chapter, when Amadis decides to return from "Gaule" to "la Grand[e] Bretaigne" (i.e. "Great Britain") to seek adventures, he has to take a ship from Gaul to Bristol (Chapter XI; ibid., p. 116.). (Other nations/realms mentioned in the French text include: Cornwall, Ireland, Denmark, Norway, Scotland...). John J. O'Connor, in his study of Amadis de Gaule, says "More than any other country France took to the Amadis cycle. French reaction must have been in large part patriotic. Amadis, after all, is "of Gaul", and the French naturally assumed that Gaul was France. Translators were quick to suggest the correspondence of the heroic personages to the heroic royalty of sixteenth-century France." (p.10). - NYArtsnWords (talk) 16:42, 16 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]
See Edwin Place, "Amadis of Gaul, Wales, or What?", Hispanic Review, 23, 1955, pp. 99-107. I'm sorry but I do not recall the author's position in this article, which I read 30 years ago. At the time, Place was the leading expert in the world on the book. O'Connor does not know Spanish. deisenbe (talk) 14:15, 17 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
According to Place, Gaula is a fictional kingdom in "little Britain" (i.e., Brittany) and is not either France/Gaul or Wales. The dominant opinion when he wrote, however, was that it was Wales. Srnec (talk) 00:48, 24 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Move request - Amadis de Gaula to Amadís de Gaula[edit]

Every single edition of or reference to the book in Spanish since about 1900 uses the accent, which is also used universally by English-language scholars of the Spanish book. There is no evidence for an "Old Spanish" or Portuguese title, since no such text (or reference to it) using "Amadis de Gaula" exists. The unaccented form was used on all 16th-century editions of the Spanish text, since modern accentuation was not established in Spain until the 18th century, but no one writing in Spanish today ever calls it "Amadis de Gaula". Look it up in http://worldcat.org if you don't believe me. "Amadis de Gaule" is found, but that is a reference to the French translation.

I can not do this myself since a redirect page "Amadís de Gaula" exists. If anyone knows the proper way to call this to an administrator's attention please do so. Thank you. deisenbe (talk) 14:29, 17 February 2016

Requested move 22 February 2016[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved per WP:COMMONNAME Mike Cline (talk) 13:53, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Amadis de Gaula → Amadís de Gaula – See discussion - last item on Talk:Amadis de Gaula deisenbe (talk) 14:42, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support per WP:COMMONNAME. A simple Google search for Amadis de Gaula shows that most reliable sources refer to Amadís de Gaula. Joseph2302 (talk) 17:33, 22 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Srnec (talk) 23:49, 23 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per WP:UE. The question is not what Spanish sources call it, but what English sources do. A simple NGRAM [2] shows us that Amadis de Gaula is considerably more commonly used in English language books than Amadís de Gaula. The same NGRAM also shows that historically "Amadis of Gaul" has been the most common title in English, but the gap has narrowed in the past 50 years, and that's now almost neck and neck with "Amadis de Gaula", with "Amadís de Gaula" considerably behind both. Thanks  — Amakuru (talk) 15:02, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Call me old-fashioned, but "the dominant practice" is not the most important factor. Bear in mind that most of these English-language sources do not use ANY accents on any words. Only if accents were being used on other words, and omitted only on "Amadís de Gaula", would this be significant. deisenbe (talk) 23:54, 3 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Amadís de Gaula. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:20, 6 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Don Bellianis: A Continuation[edit]

Of interest perhaps, is in sources such as this, the adventures of Don Bellianis has been noted as a continuation of Amadís.--Lmstearn (talk) 06:35, 1 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Amadís_de_Gaula&oldid=1204774306"