# Hispania, Hispanic, España and Espanha



## killerbee256

I saw an article about how in the next US census, Portuguese people will be considered Hispanic. Of course this upsets some Portuguese nationals, but Roman _Hispania _included modern Portugal so from an analytical point view this makes sense. I know there is considerable history behind this; in the middle ages _Hispania_, _España_ and _Espanha_ were geographic terms only and various Iberian kingdoms including Portugal were known as "little Spains." At what point did this change so that Portugal was no longer "Hispanic"? Was it the merged kingdoms of Leon-Castile and crown of Aragon taking the name? The failure of the Iberian union?


----------



## NorwegianNYC

It is more to the point of the failure of the U.S. census system! As an international in New York City, I can give you many examples of this. I have two friends from Brazil - one of them is white, the one other black. They both have residency in the U.S., but one of them was advised to put down 'African-American' and the other 'Hispanic' on the census. My good friend Sami was reprimanded for jokingly checking 'African-American' on the form, although his family is from Egypt, and therefore he could easily justify both claims. The couple Ranjit (from Detroit, his parents are Indian) and Nayma (from Pakistan) were advised to put (respectively) 'South-East Asian' and 'Middle Eastern', although the speak the same language (Hindi-Urdu). On the other hand, Manny (his real name is Manuel and is born in Madrid), was told he was 'White', and not 'Hispanic', because he was from Europe!

The U.S. census is really not the best way to determine these things!


----------



## CapnPrep

Maybe we can actually address killerbee's question, which was not about the US Census?





killerbee256 said:


> At what point did this change so that Portugal was no longer "Hispanic"?


This Wikipedia article seems to provide the answer:


> Hasta finales del siglo XVII, inicios del siglo XVIII, todos los pueblos de la península ibérica se consideraban españoles [...]
> Con dificultad los portugueses se sintieron obligados a dejar de llamarse también españoles, a fin de no ser tomados por castellanos, a medida que se desarrollaba la castellanización de otros reinos de la Hispania.



As for English usage, the term _Hispanic_ has apparently not been in continuous use; the OED gives a first citation from 1972, where it refers to Spanish-speaking immigrants, especially those from Latin America, living in the US. The status of Brazilians in the US is not entirely clear to me; for official purposes like the census, a decision has to be made, and I suspect that the Portuguese problem is an extension of the Brazilian question. In any case, if they do decide to enlarge the definition of _Hispanic_ in this way, it will not necessarily catch on in everyday usage, and if it does, it won't be because people recognize the historical reference to Roman Hispania(e). Personally, if I ever needed an adjectival form of _Hispania_, I would not use _Hispanic_, but something else, like _Hispanian_.


----------



## killerbee256

CapnPrep said:


> In any case, if they do decide to enlarge the definition of _Hispanic_ in this way, it will not necessarily catch on in everyday usage, and if it does, it won't be because people recognize the historical reference to Roman Hispania(e). Personally, if I ever needed an adjectival form of _Hispania_, I would not use _Hispanic_, but something else, like _Hispanian_.


Thank you, I should check other languages on wikipedia more often. Honestly if I worked for the census I would have chosen _Latino_ instead of _Hispanic_ as it uncontroversially includes the Spanish, Portuguese and all of Latin America, thought that has it's own problems because it can also include Italians, French and Romanians.


----------



## CapnPrep

For the most recent census, the terms _Hispanic_, _Latino_, and _Spanish_ were considered to be interchangeable when referring to ethnic origin. In other words, the option was consistently offered as "Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin". But then people were asked to specify a more specific origin (e.g. Spaniard).

And of course everyone is allowed to identify with whatever group or groups they wish, apparently just like in the Soviet Union...


----------



## fdb

Are you talking about the US, or France?


----------



## Wolverine9

killerbee256 said:


> Thank you, I should check other languages on wikipedia more often. Honestly if I worked for the census I would have chosen _Latino_ instead of _Hispanic_ as it uncontroversially includes the Spanish, Portuguese and all of Latin America, thought that has it's own problems because it can also include Italians, French and Romanians.



The U.S. census doesn't have a separate category for Hispanics; rather, there is one category termed "Hispanic/Latino/Spanish".  If Portuguese and Brazilians were to be added to this they would need to add a ".../Portuguese" to the category.  And Latino is defined as "having an origin in Latin America", so by this definition French, Italian, etc. would be excluded.


----------



## CapnPrep

fdb said:


> Are you talking about the US, or France?


The US, of course. The French census does not use English terms.


----------



## fdb

So who are these people that are "advising" people in no. 2?


----------



## CapnPrep

fdb said:


> So who are these people that are "advising" people in no. 2?


That is not an etymology/language question... Maybe you can ask it in Culture Café.


----------



## berndf

*Moderator note: Can we please concentrate on the original question when "Hispanic" ceased to include Portugal. Discussion of the US census system is beyond the scope of this forum.
*


----------



## Outsider

berndf said:


> *the original question when "Hispanic" ceased to include Portugal.*


It seems as though the question is backwards. CapnPrep has provided above a source according to which:



> [...] the OED gives a first citation from 1972, where it refers to  Spanish-speaking immigrants, especially those from Latin America, living  in the US.


If so, then "Hispanic" originally did not include Portuguese or Brazilians.


----------



## killerbee256

It's debatable if _hispanic_ was meant to include Brazil or not, as _hispanic_ is used as a regional sudonym for _latino_, which refers to all Latin Americans. As I'd like to note many Americans, to my great annoyance, don't know that Brazilian don't speak Spanish. As for Portugal the Spanish wiki article says the Portuguese began to think of themselves as being different from the Spanish after the failure of the Iberian union.


----------



## Youngfun

I've always understood _Hispanic_ as Spanish, while _Iberian_ meaning Spain + Portugal + Gibraltar, and maybe Andorra too - as in "Iberian Peninsula".


----------



## CapnPrep

Outsider said:


> If so, then "Hispanic" originally did not include Portuguese or Brazilians.


That is apparently true for the English word _Hispanic_, but there are older terms like _Hispanical _that may have been used differently. Also, it was clear that killer's question was not limited to English usage.





Youngfun said:


> as in "Iberian Peninsula".


Also known as... the Hispanic Peninsula.


----------



## Quiviscumque

Original question:

_At what point did this change so that Portugal was no longer "Hispanic"?_

Concerning English (or American English) usage, I cannot make any contributions.

Concerning Portuguese official stance and the words "Spain", "Spanish", CapnPrep (message #3) gave the answer. As Stanley G. Payne says (my poor translation)

_As far as I know,  the last important occasion when Portuguese Crown questioned the use by Madrid rulers of the expressions "Corona de España" o "Monarquía de España" was  in times of the Treaty of Utrecht in 1714”._

Concerning "Hispanoamérica", "hispanoamericano", "hispánico", and Spanish usage, the "Diccionario Panhispánico de Dudas" (RAE) says:

_*Hispanoamérica*. Nombre que recibe el conjunto de países americanos de lengua española [...]  hispanoamericano se refiere estrictamente a lo perteneciente o relativo a la América española y no incluye, por tanto, lo perteneciente o relativo a España.
__*Iberoamérica.* Nombre que recibe el conjunto de países americanos que formaron parte de los reinos de España y Portugal [...] _ _iberoamericano [...] en ocasiones incluye también en su designación lo perteneciente o relativo a España y Portugal._

And the "Diccionario de la Real Academia Española" says
*hispánico, ca. *
_1. Perteneciente o relativo a la antigua Hispania o a los pueblos que formaron parte de ella._
_2. Perteneciente o relativo a España y a los países y culturas de habla española._

So, calling "Hispanic" to present Portuguese people is not standard Spanish usage (nor standard Portuguese usage, as far as I know). 

It is only acceptable if you are considering things from a historical point of view, or you want to stress the links between both peoples (but then "ibérico" is the preferred word).


----------



## Youngfun

CapnPrep said:


> Also known as... the Hispanic Peninsula.


Not in Italy. We only call it _Penisola Iberica_.


----------



## CapnPrep

Youngfun said:


> Not in Italy. We only call it _Penisola Iberica_.


Have you checked? I'm not saying that _Penisola Ispanica_ is commonly used today (in Italian, or in English, Spanish, …) but some authors use it in historical or academic contexts. And some others seem to prefer it for some personal political agenda (see here, for example).


----------



## Outsider

killerbee256 said:


> As for Portugal the Spanish wiki article says the Portuguese began to think of themselves as being different from the Spanish after the failure of the Iberian union.


A bold claim for which I doubt there is any clear evidence. Again I feel that your question is backwards. Rather than asking when the Portuguese began to think of themselves as being different from the Spanish, you would do better to ask when the Castillians, the Catalans, the Basques, etc., began to think of themselves as "Spanish". 

But I don't think you'll find evidence concerning either question in the history of the word "Hispanic". The histories of "Spain" and "Spanish" are likely to be more helpful in that regard.


----------



## killerbee256

Outsider said:


> A bold claim for which I doubt there is any clear evidence. Again I feel that your question is backwards. Rather than asking when the Portuguese began to think of themselves as being different from the Spanish, you would do better to ask when the Castillians, the Catalans, the Basques, etc., began to think of themselves as "Spanish".


Let me make myself clear I don't mean the modern meaning of the term "Spanish" I was referring to pre 1492, before the Castillian kings hijacked the term. When it was still thought of as a geographic term, when Portugal was just one of the "little spains." I'd have to do some research but I think Castillians, Catalans and Portuguese all thought of themselves as "Spanish" from Roman times, thought as I said this was long before Castillians politicized it. The situation in Italy is similar, as it was broken into smaller political units after the eastern Romans lost control of the region and the term "Italian" was purely geographical and for that matter there are areas/people in Italy that dislike being called "Italian" the same way Portuguese and various independence movements in Spain dislike "Spanish"!


----------



## Quiviscumque

killerbee256 said:


> Let me make myself clear I don't mean the modern meaning of the term "Spanish" I was referring to pre 1492, before the Castillian kings hijacked the term.



Ehmm... Neither "Castillian kings" nor "hijacked the term".

The official intitulation of Fernando and Isabel was

_Rey y Reina de Castilla, de Aragón, de León, de las dos Sicilias, de Jerusalén, de Granada, de Toledo, de Valençia, de Galicia, de Mallorcas, de Sevilla, de Cerdeña, de Córdoba, de Córcega, de Murcia, de Jaén, de los Algarves, de Algeciras, de Gibraltar, de las Islas de Canaria e de las Indias, tierra firme del Mar Océano, condes de Barcelona, señores de Vizcaya y de Molina, duques de Atenas y de Neopatria, condes de Rosellón y Cerdaña, marqueses de Oristán y de Goceano.
_


killerbee256 said:


> When it was still thought of as a geographic term, when Portugal was just one of the "little spains."



Ehmm... "Hispania", "España" was never a mere geographical term: it conveyed a certain historical, cultural and political meaning. Of course you cannot export the idea of "national state" to the Middle Ages; the meaning was much more soft.



killerbee256 said:


> I'd have to do some research but I think Castillians, Catalans and Portuguese all thought of themselves as "Spanish" from Roman times, thought as I said this was long before Castillians politicized it.



I cannot understand your last point. Concerning your first point, may I say that Camoens feels free to use "Espanha"?:

_Ouvido tinha aos Fados que viria
Uma gente fortíssima de Espanha
Pelo mar alto, a qual sujeitaria
Da índia tudo quanto Dóris banha,[...]_


----------



## killerbee256

Quiviscumque said:


> I cannot understand your last point. Concerning your first point, may I say that Camoens feels free to use "Espanha"?:


Forgive me for not being clearer, I mean _Espanha_ as a phonic evolution of _Hispania_, that retained the connotation of the Latin form. Your right that Castile didn't "high jack" the term directly that it is more complex then that, perhaps a better way to put it would be to say that the Portuguese rejected the term some time after 1640 as a challenge to Castilian imperialism.


----------



## cansado

killerbee256 said:


> I saw an article about how in the next US census, Portuguese people will  be considered Hispanic. Of course this upsets some Portuguese  nationals, but Roman _Hispania _included modern Portugal so from an analytical point view this makes sense.


Also  the Romans did differences .Roman Hispania was never an unique provincia,it was always divided in two or more provinciae.It is not a US census problem , but a generalization problem.Often i heard people that superficially says:"he is english",and instead he is irish ..or "he is american" ,and instead he is canadian ..or "he is german" ,and instead he is danish ..or "he is chinese" and instead he is korean.


----------



## killerbee256

cansado said:


> Often i heard people that superficially says:"he is english",and instead he is irish ..or "he is american" ,and instead he is canadian ..or "he is german" ,and instead he is danish ..or "he is chinese" and instead he is korean.


 I can think of an even better example of what your talking about, the term "British." But in the case of Hispania I think the term developed a since of nationalism or at least of being a kingdom during the Visigothic era.


----------



## NorwegianNYC

There is an ongoing debate/controversy in the US regarding the labeling. 'Hispanic' is an East coast term, whereas 'Latino' is used on the West coast. 'Latino' is of course short for Sp. _latinomericano_ and Port. _latino americano_, and is technically a linguistic definition which is meant to encompass Romance language speakers in the Americas. 'Latino' is therefore a better term than 'Hispanic' in this particular regard, since it includes both Spanish and Portuguese speakers, but a 2000 poll showed 65% preferring 'Hispanic'. However, it is not without problems:
1) Belize and Guyana are Anglophone countries in Central/South America (although Guyana is usually considered a Caribbean country) 
2) (Partly) Dutch-speaking Suriname and Francophone French Guyana, are located in South America, but can be considered Caribbean countries
3) Quebec is Francophone
4) Speakers of Native American languages may or may not be included


----------



## Wolverine9

Why would speakers of Native American languages potentially be included in the definition of Hispanic or Latino?


----------



## killerbee256

Wolverine9 said:


> Why would speakers of Native American languages potentially be included in the definition of Hispanic or Latino?


That's one of my problems with the current paradigm, if a person's from one side of the boarder that person is called "Indian" "Native Americans" if they're from the other they're "Mexican," "Hispanic" or "Latino." As an anthropologist this really annoys me.


----------



## Angelo di fuoco

CapnPrep said:


> That is apparently true for the English word _Hispanic_, but there are older terms like _Hispanical _that may have been used differently. Also, it was clear that killer's question was not limited to English usage.Also known as... the Hispanic Peninsula.


Пиренейский полуостров in Russian: Pyrenee peninsula.


----------



## killerbee256

Angelo di fuoco said:


> Пиренейский полуостров in Russian: Pyrenee peninsula.


Looks like a loanword from French and perhaps the usage is influenced by Greek Πυρηναία- Pirinaía.


----------



## NorwegianNYC

Wolverine9 said:


> Why would speakers of Native American languages potentially be included in the definition of Hispanic or Latino?


Killerbee's point is valid. If you grow up speaking Nahuatl, Quechua, Aymara - and perhaps some broken Spanish - you are "Hispanic"; whereas if you are Iroquois, but do not speak a single word of Iroquois, you are Native American. It is a most peculiar system in that regard.


----------



## cansado

I have problems to understand how this census works.Apparently it seems to refer to an old law (but i must admit my ignorance ), but when it has been introduced? It has been updated?
A census definition is :
"A *census* is the procedure of systematically acquiring and recording  information about the members of a given population."
Informations on  ethnicity can be dangerous,for example, during the WWII this kind of informations helped the Nazis to find more quickly.... people "unwanted".


----------



## berndf

Just a reminder:



berndf said:


> *Moderator note: ... Discussion of the US census system is beyond the scope  of this forum.*


----------



## berndf

Moderator note: The topic of this thread concerns the etymology of _Hispania, Hispanic, España and Espanha_ and not of the word _Latino_. If you wish to discuss this, please open a new thread but remember that this forum is about etymology and language history and not ethnology, sociology, demographics etc. The topic of this thread seems to be exhausted and I am therefore closing the thread. I you wish to contribute to the topic, please contact me or another moderator.


----------

