Talk:Senyera

colours vatican flag

"Kingdom of Aragon used and adopted the colours of the Vatican" (in the eleventh century says the aragonesist theory). "According to the "Encyclopedia Britannica", the flag of the Holy See's Navy(!!) from XII century was red and yellow vertical" Could the author of this sentence show me where does Britannica say this?

"The Vatican City State has never had an army, navy or airforce" says this Wikipedia article [1]. Who is right?

And there's another conflict on wikipedia articles [2], [3]. So there are two incompatibilities articles on wikipedia with this sentence.

"In the whole middle age red was the colour of Catholic Church, and gold was used for the crossed papal keys. Napoleon mixed his army with papal, so pope Pius VII decided new colours should be found." Pius VII choose gold and silver, and those were accepted in 1825. The flag was used until 1870, when the state was integrated into Italy. When the City of Vatican was formed as separate state, it took the same flag in 1929. (Željko Heimer, 16 May 1996 [4])

Whitney Smith.Flags Through the Ages and Across the World. McGraw-Hill Book Co.: New York (United States). 1975 (1st ed.) ISBN 978-0-07-059093-7

--Sclua (talk) 12:52, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

That particular wikipedia article you mention 1 is wrong! Just take a look at Battle of Lepanto (1571), The papal navy, 1500 or The list of Papal ships.

"Papal ships will be referred as HHFS - His Holy Father's Ship - before ship's name.These abbreviations will distinguish same ship´s name from different nations and government warships from pivateers or privately-owned merchantmen.

The Pontifical Navy (Marina Militare Pontificia) was formed by the John VIII (875-881) and ceased to exist when the main naval base Civitavecchia was incorporated into the Kingdom of Italy in 1870. Untill 1815 the Navy ships were united with the Merchant Navy under supervision of Prefetto di S. Angelo as commisario del mare. In 1798 twelve the most valuable ships were taken by Napoleon to meet their fate at Aboukir on August 1st, 1798. With the return of the Pope Pius VII to Rome on May 26th, 1814 the Navy was reorganized passing under control of the Camerlengo di Santa Romana Chiesa. In 1817 a Custom Service was formed. In 1828 the Presidenza delle Armi was constituted and the navy passed under its control." --Maurice27 (talk) 21:19, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

OK, there was a pontificial navy, but please tell how to find the article on the Britannica, would you please be so kind to paste part of the article about the colours of the navy in the eleventh or twelveth century or tell me the name of the article? thanks. --Sclua (talk) 19:31, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

I don't know which is the correct artile on Britannica, but the Holy See official site says that it used a yellow and red flag until 1808 (I don't know how to locate the english version of this page):

"En el pasado, la bandera del Estado pontificio era de color amarillo y granate (o mejor dicho, carmesì y rojo, colores relacionados con el escudo de la Santa Sede), dos colores tradicionales del Senado y del Pueblo romano. Estos fueron sustituidos después en 1808 con el blanco y el amarillo, cuando Pio VII (...)" [5]

Translation: "In the past, the flag of the Pontificial State was of color yellow and grenate (translates as Maroon?) (or better said, carmesi (translates as Crimson?), colors related to the coat of arms of the Holy See), two colors traditionals of the Roman People and Senate. Those were substituted later on 1808 with the white and the yellow, when Pius VII"

(I corrected this post due to a small error on the translation) It appears to mean that the flag was composed by yellow and by a shade of red that is a mixture of red and crimsom. The italian version only mentions "giallorossa ([or better said] amaranto e rossa)":

"Anticamente la bandiera dello Stato pontificio era giallorossa (o per meglio dire amaranto e rossa, colori derivati dai colori dello stemma della Santa Sede), i due colori tradizionali del Senato e del Popolo romano, che vennero tuttavia sostituiti con il bianco e il giallo nel 1808, allorché Pio VII" [6]

For the lovers of conspiracies, the english version and french version only mention the current flag. --Enric Naval (talk) 19:24, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

I need to check the rest of the italian version, to see if it says more things about the colors, or about usage by the city of Rome. --Enric Naval (talk) 20:42, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

GEA Gran Enciclopedia Aragonesa source

I've supressed a source clearly biased. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.125.97.102 (talk) 23:55, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Flags of Sicily and the city of Naples

Today the island of Sicily and the city of Naples still have the colours gold and red in their flags and coat of arms and both were in the Crown of Aragon, should this be mentioned? Although its not strickly "bars"? - Gennarous (talk) 15:58, 10 April 2008 (UTC)

Falses statements

This article is full of falses statements and lies. It needs a revision.--Sclua (talk) 11:52, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

The article does need a revision, but please provide source on which statements are false and use fact tags on unsourced or dubious facts instead of deleting them to give other editors an oportunity to see the tag when reviewing the article and source them or change them. This article is from 2004, where online citations were not used, so it's severely under-sourced --Enric Naval (talk) 13:52, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

County of Foix with the same arms. A prove that were not "aragonese" this arms

The current version has to be cleared all and start it as new. It is impossible to improve all this amount of lies and nonsenses. It is false that Desclot or Muntaner (Foix and Lauria) called "Bars of Aragon" to the personal signal of the kings; it is false the theory of the papals colours; the legend of Wifred was against normands and, of couse, there were pales in the seal of Ramon Berenguer IV count of Barcelona as accepted by all the members of the International Heraldry Academy.The Aragonese only are editing with Aragonese nationalists sources. Outside Aragon nobody waste the time with such amount of nonsenses. --Sclua (talk) 13:24, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

I have warned Sclua for repeatedly ignoring sources and POV-pushing[7]. The only sources he apports are his personal interpretation of a flag image and a wikipedia article that he had just reverted to a POV version --Enric Naval (talk) 19:03, 6 May 2008 (UTC)

Sclua, you will have to produce the exact page of Faustino Menéndez-Pidal's work that you are referring to, and then explain what the heck this has to do with removing the government of aragon source and it's caption here and here which cites a work by aragonese historicians Fatás and Redondo. Just claiming that a certain historician claims something without citing where or when he does so is not enough. Also notice that there is a difference between saying that the seal had bars and saying that the coat of arms was a symbol of the counts. I haven't read "palos de oro y gules" myself, but I can see at this source that they are using it to source this sentence "Las interpretaciones y versiones de la leyenda son muy variadas, aunque todas responderían a la finalidad de ofrecer un origen ilustre, mítico-heroico si se quiere, a las armas de una de las monarquías con más poder e influencia de todo el medioevo, aun a sabiendas que dichas armas tuvieron hasta finales de la Edad Media carácter de armas familiares de los descendientes del primer príncipe de Aragón y conde de Barcelona, y no armas territoriales" which happens to be on agreement with what the source that you removed says (apologies for people who can't read spanish).

I can also see a dossier by the Center of Politic and Institutional Estudies from Government of Spain that says that the coat of arms is a symbol of the count-kings that were sovereigns of Barcelona[8](page 4), which is also not in disagreement with the caption that was sourced by the government of aragon source, and those are the guys that edited Menendez-Pidal's "Historia de España" that won the 2000 National History Prize(footnote on page 1).Stating that an historician says that there were bars on that seal is ok, but using that info to make claims about what the bars represent is original research. You also making that mistake on the article you link to, putting together several primary sources to make synthesis and extract conclusions from the primary sources. Sorry, but your evidence is not convincing at all, and your edits are always towards eliminating a certain type of sources and information, and are always giving more weight to the Catalonia and taking weight from Catalonia. Always. Your insistance that every aragonese theory is "another lie of the aragonese nationalists"[9] including its repetition at edit summaries is not helping at all --Enric Naval (talk) 13:30, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

The Aragonese member of International Heraldry Academy Faustino Menéndez-Pidal tells in all his works ("I seminario sobre heraldica y genealogía", "Apuntes de sigilografía española", "Los Emblemas heráldicos: una interpretación histórica" "Palos de oro y gules"...) that the signal was the personal first, and familiar then, signal of Ramon Berenguer IV, Count of Barcelona. All his three sons (there's a seal of Ramon Berenguer Count of Provence and Sanç with bars too (see L.Blancard, "Iconographie des sceaux et bulles conservés...") inherited from his father the emblem (not only Alfons) so this arms were not Aragonese but of the lineage of the Counts of Barcelona.

• The emblem was lineage emblem and the kings considered themselves of the lineage of the Counts of Barcelona. King James the first, (1213-1276), wrote or dictated at various stages a chronicle of his own life, Llibre dels fets, where you can find this statement, and the Chronicle of the king Peter, the Ceremonious,(1336-1387), chapter XXI where you can read "the kingdom, without aragonese male descendent, was transfered to the count of Barcelona ("el dito Regno en defallimiento de heredero masculino prouino á Conte de Barchinona"). In the same chronicle you can read that the king Alfons, the chast (1163-1196) "left the aragoneses arms and signals and get the bars" [10] so the bars were not aragonese. In this chronicle, version of 1366, there's a miniature where you can see Wilfred the Hairy, count of Barcelona (878-897), the beginner of the Barcelonian lineage, painted with the coat of arms of the pales red and gold. This is an anachrony but it means that the king related, again, the signal to the Counts of Barcelona.
• there's documents of the Kings and Queens where is affirmed that the signal originally was of the County of Barcelona (or Catalonia) like the Queen Maria de Luna on 1396 "signal of the County of Barcelona, bars yellow and red" and the King Martin the humane on 1406 "the flag of the Principalty of Catalonia, the called royal flag."
• All the members of the International Heraldry Academy accepted bars in the seals of Ramon Berenguer IV and i think, they are not Catalans nationalists.
• Could anybody tell me a Middle Ages sepulcher of a sovereign with wrong arms? The analysis of the paintings showed that they were of the same period of other Middle Ages paintings so it doesn't matter if it was painted on the 11th or 12th Century and there is no bars in any tomb of the aragonese kings before the union.
• After the union, the sovereign was the ruler over Aragon due to his title of King of Aragon and was the ruler of the Catalonia due to his title of the Count of Barcelona. The territories of the king of France were the Kingdom of France but the territories of the king of Aragon were not the Kingdom of Aragon. This is the reason to created a modern word like Crown of Aragon but in the Middle Ages all the territories did not have name but "territories of the king".

Zaragoza adopted the coat of arms of its king, Alfonso VII of Lion-Castilian

• Nobody outside Aragon disputes the bars in the seals of Ramon Berenguer IV. In the Middle Ages this escutcheon was familiar not territorial escutcheon. The prove is it was adopted by Counts of Provence, Counts of Foix, Giudicis Arborea (party) or kings of Mallorques (all they descendents of Counts of Barcelona and not all descendents of Petronila of Aragon). The lineage, as the same kings consider themselves, was the lineage of the Counts of Barcelona. . *i have read "Actes du II Colloque international d'héraldique". Breassone.1981. Académie internationale d'héraldique. Les Origines des armoiries. Paris. ISBN 2-86377-030-6. "Les pals de Barcelone s'etendent à l'Aragon, à la Provence et au comté de Foix" (the bars of Barcelona were extended (adopted) to Aragon, Provence and County of Foix". Léon Jéquier.
• On 1150, Ramiro, king of the Aragonese, was still alive but there are no trace of pales or seals with pales in his documents. Neither documents of Petronila. Zaragoza adopted the emblem of the lion of his king, Alfonso VII of Lion-Castilian, king of the Kingdom of Zaragoza from 1134. It is another prove that Alfonso, the Battler, had not emblem.
• From 1150, on the Middle Ages, the arms were too the arms of the kings of Aragon, counts of Provence, counts of Foix, kings of Mallorques, and party, Judge of Arborea, Kings of Sicily...--Sclua (talk) 13:43, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

About the sentence "Nobody outside Aragon disputes the bars in the seals of Ramon Berenguer IV.", you need to find a source that actually states that. Currently, your usage of that sentence is WP:SYNTH synthesis because you are putting together several sources that don't say such a thing and using them to back that sentence. Please find a source that says such a thing.

Also, please stop making original research by making interpretations of primary sources. You need a verifiable reliable source for interpretations of things like the miniature of Wilfred the Hairy. You say "This is an anachrony but it means that the king related, again, the signal to the Counts of Barcelona.", but this is just your personal interpretation of a primary source, and is not an analysis published on secondary sources.

You are also making heavy use of synthesis and original research on analyzing Ramiro's and Petronila's documents, saying that the adoption of the emblem of Zaragoza is a proof of Alfonso the battler not having an anblem, etc, etc, etc. It's OK to discuss the sources on the talk page, but you are insisting on making original research all the time despite the warnings I have been giving you, and you should stop using these arguments to back stuff on the actual articles or to rebuff arguments with sources, even if the sources are tertiary sources. --Enric Naval (talk) 06:07, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

It's remarkable how this Naval guy just brushes aside all the evidence and sources provided by Sclua to force upon the rest of us two weak, biased sources which belong in the "alternative" department, if that much. It is OK to allow some space for the biased, partial versions that try to steal the focus away from Catalonia to fulfill a very transparent, kind of brutish, nationalistic agenda, but they shouldn't share the main stage with the undisputable evidence Sclua brings forward. The reason being that although it is true that there is no contradiction between the truth and the anti-Catalan statement that the Four Bars appear as a personal signal of the Count of Barcelona to become that of the kingdom he acquires from his mother, it is subtly but undeniably misleading. The complete truth is that the Signal is inherited from his father, who was not King of Aragon, but "just" Count of Barcelona. Now Mr Naval can keep pushing for his nationalistic agenda and manipulative version of history. The rest of us will just obediently keep quiet, as we underlings are supposed to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 218.186.19.10 (talk) 14:12, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

almogavers using pennon of aragon

I found another source on Google Books, but it will only let me see a tiny part of the page [11], appears to be almogavers attacking italians. --Enric Naval (talk) 16:29, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Another one [12], this is also the chronicle of Ramon Muntaner, like the source I put on the article, so it must be the same text. --Enric Naval (talk) 16:39, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

As I could see this book is written in french. Frenchs doesn't like Catalans; And the coat of arms you say it's from aragonese, it isn't true. La Senyera came from the coat of arms of the casal de Barcelona, not from the aragón.

And a source for James I carrying a pennon (in 1229 in Languedoc, if I'm reading it correctly) [13], but it only says that the arms of Aragon are on the shield, it doesn't mention what is on the pennon. It later mentions on page 273 that on the Peninsule, the "premières" (?) went to war under the pennon of the knight and under the banner of the baron. --Enric Naval (talk) 16:51, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

== Article to be moved to "Flag of Catalonia" ==

As the Dannebrog is redirected to Flag of Denmark, the Hinomaru is redirected to Flag of Japan and the Tricouleur is redirected to Flag of France, Senyera is to be redirected to Flag of Catalonia, which is the common usage here in wikipedia. Everyone agrees? --MauritiusXXVII ^{(Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!)} 21:28, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

I believe that another move will be more interesting instead. Let me explain it below. --MauritiusXXVII ^{(Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!)} 23:49, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Senyera Vs. Flag of Catalonia

The content of the Senyera article is rather fiting in a "generalistic" article about the flags derived from the medieval arms of the Crown, while it lacks of the specific information about ratios, construction sheet and legislation of the present flag of Catalonia. It is a similar case to the Flag of Valencia, when I decided to create a separate article as "Flag of Valencia".

This article has many similarities (aka: edit wars problems) now, as the article Coat of arms of Catalonia had some time ago. The problem was that, deriving both the flags and the coats of arms of quite some territories (Aragon, Balears, Catalonia and Valencia) from the medieval Crown of Aragon, many users failed (me included) to reach an agreement in the content of the article. This was luckily fast solved by creating the article Coat of arms of the Crown of Aragon, which included all the info about the ancient coat of arms, hypothesis about the origin etc, etc.

This left the article Coat of arms of Catalonia free of any editing dispute.

So, I propose to make the Senyera article a specific article about the vexillological symbol of the arms of Aragon which could include in its content its origins and history followed by a disambiguation or links to multiple article about its heirs, the Aragonese, Balear, Catalan and Valencian flags.

I guess some Catalanists users will complain for not "reserving" the name Senyera to the Catalan flag article (as we all admit catalonia is the region whose flag is nowadays called this way), but I really believe it will improve the chances to make a good specific article about the flag of Catalonia including specific information about ratios, construction sheet and legislation of the present flag without having to be extremely cautious not to hurt the feelings of people from other regions which also claim the "Senyera" or "Señera" as theirs. --MauritiusXXVII ^{(Aut Doce, Aut Disce, Aut Discede!)} 00:07, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I think it would be a good idea. But I am also aware of the endless debates and edit wars regarding the ratio of the Valencian Flag. I wish that the ratio issue could be settled before we drag it to another article. --the Dúnadan 00:22, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I'm working on a settlement on the flag ratio issue. Let's leave this section to discuss only the article split thing, or it will become a mess. --Enric Naval (talk) 00:51, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

I think it's a good idea. It's obvious that a Flag of Aragon article will have very different content from Flag of Valencia, Flag of Majorca and Flag of Catalonia, and that all of them will have a lot of duplicate content that should be merged into a single article on the common origins (this single article being the Senyera article). --Enric Naval (talk) 00:51, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

May show go on? --Maurice27 _{About Me, Talk, Vandalize}. 18:52, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Sure.-- dúnadan : let's talk 20:46, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Senyera. 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/20080421054328/http://www.gencat.net/catalunya/eng/simbols.htm to http://www.gencat.net/catalunya/eng/simbols.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081015004609/http://www.vaticanstate.va/IT/Stato_e_Governo/NoteGenerali/Bandiera.htm to http://www.vaticanstate.va/IT/Stato_e_Governo/NoteGenerali/Bandiera.htm

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: 5 June 2024).

• 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) 22:42, 11 December 2017 (UTC)