Re: Latin form Alphonso [sic]
- From: Nathaniel Taylor <nltaylor@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2007 13:44:58 -0500
Francisco Tavares de Almeida <francisco.tavaresdealmeida@xxxxxxxxx>
On 1 Dez, 02:58, Nathaniel Taylor <nltay...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Nathaniel Taylor <nltay...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Francisco Tavares de Almeida <francisco.tavaresdealme...@xxxxxxxxx>
. . . The gothic
'athal'>'adal' (nowadays 'edel') left perfect traces in the forms
'Adelffonsus' in a document of 915 and Adelphonsi in 1050.
As I said, different spellings could be found like 'Adfonsus'
'Anfunsus' but also 'Aldefonsus' and 'Ildefonsus'. The first ocurrence
of the modern spanish 'Alfonso' - presumably A(de)lfonso - is from 875
and last used in Portugal in 1256 (will of Mahaud of Savoy) while the
modern portuguese Afonso is first found in 1024.
So I would say that the names did not become conflated but what become
sometimes conflated was the spelling in what somebody aptly called dog
This is interesting to me. I always assume that the forms 'Adefonsus'
and 'Ildefonsus' found in documents from the 9th & 10th centuries are
interchangeably used for the same people. I would like to see examples
where this can be showed to refer to distinct names. Does this
onomastic dictionary address that at all?
In thinking further about this, I would like to be certain that the two
isolated instances of an apparently clear form 'Adalfonsus' (given here
as from 915 and 1050) are not themselves aberrations. Generally in this
period I find few such forms compared with an abundance of the type
'Ildefonsus' (though it would be nice if someone could check the indexes
of the published document collection of the cathedral of Leon, which I
don't have in my study--I have mostly Aragonese & Catalonian charters at
home). I would still need to be persuaded that distinct names were in
use here simultaneously.
This reminds me of the discussion about whether 'Godefridus' and
'Gozfridus' were understood to be distinct in the 11th-12th c in the Low
Countries and England, and whether they had evolved from the same roots
(a discussion around the allegation of the English marriage and
offspring of 'Godefroy' de Bouillon).
The onomastic dictionary refers to existing documents but for the
conclusions expressed in the article I have to trust the author. He is
undisputable the best but the also first to admit a fair amount of
possible errors. As he identified the gothic origin and cited those
documents as corroborative he clearly did not considered them
Also as you know - and presumably Richardson doesn't - galician-
portuguese was one of the first languages in Iberia and well
differentiated from castilian or navarrese so I can not assume that
the portuguese reality is not different in Aragón. This said, the name
'Ildefonso' originated in Portugal from St. Ildefonso, Archbishop of
Toledo d. 667 and it is found in several places both in the form Santo
Ildefonso, or just Ildefonso, including some very old parishes. From
its toponymical use, it originated some family names (in small number)
but not a given name. Of course, in Spain, closer to Toledo's
influence, given name may occur; I do not know.
In Portugal and in these strict senses - hagiografical? and
toponymical? - the latin was always 'Ildefonsus'.
For the given name Afonso the reality is much different with all the
cited forms amongst them also 'Ildefonsus'. Considering that Toledo
was far away - and sometime a strong competitor with portuguese Braga
- I do not think that we can find in Portugal one single document
referring to both names, the given name and the hagiografical? name.
About different spellings, the 'spanish' frame is not different as can
be seen in Velde's heraldica.org about Alfonso XI <<his first name is
spelled many ways: Alfonsys, Ildefonsus, Alfosus, Illefosus, Alfonsus>>
For the question that aroused your curiosity - if I am not wrong - you
have an enlightening example in queen Berengaria's 'carta de
arras' (dowry of Castroverde) <<ego Adefonsus, Dei gratia rex Legionis
do in dotem uxore mee regine domne Berengaria, filie domni Aldefonsi>>.
Francisco, thank you for this further comment. My presumption of
interchangeability of Latinizations which appear as 'Adal-' and 'Ildi-'
has always been colored by my familiarity with charters from Aragon and
Catalonia. In an enormous recent edition of the acts of Alfonso II of
Aragon (1162-96), I see that in *original* acts he uses both Adefonsus
and Ildefonsus--far more frequently the latter.
But on the other hand, the name (or names) was/were uncommon in
Catalonia/Aragon in earlier centuries, so how scribes there Latinized it
might not truly reflect its etymology. For example, among the few
examples of this name I find in pre-1000 Catalonia is a charter of 920
in the Arxiu del Catedral de Barcelona (unfortunately only extant as a
copy in the Libri antiquitatum of around 1200), in which one 'Galindo,
gallicense' donates to the cathedral some landed property of his late
son, 'Adifons[us]'. This is the only example of the name in all the
earliest charters of Barcelona itself, and the name is associated with a
Galician. Other early renderings I find in Catalonia / Aragon,
scattered in original charters: 'Ildovuonsus' (929), 'Eldevolsus' [sic]
(934), 'Adevons[us] (996), Adefonsus (898), 'Advonsus' (1003).
I'd still like to see what a survey of the recently-published document
collection from a place like the cathedral of Leon, where the name was
certainly a local choice of long-standing, shows for Latinizations.
- Prev by Date: Re: PECK DESCENT FROM CHARLEMAGNE
- Next by Date: Re: PECK DESCENT FROM CHARLEMAGNE
- Previous by thread: Re: Latin form Alphonso [sic]
- Next by thread: Re: PECK DESCENT FROM CHARLEMAGNE