Quantum redactiones paginae "Disputatio:Stephanus Thomae filius" differant
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Linea 2:
:According to the text, both the subject of the article and his father were Thomas's Stephen, so I added "I" and "II." If he really called himself a despot, that's fine, and maybe you'd like to add an article on that topic. In Greek, it's ''despotes.'' [[Usor:IacobusAmor|IacobusAmor]] 00:26, 13 Iulii 2010 (UTC)
::"Despotus" looks to me like an error in that source, unless somehow it was standard in medieval Bosnia. The term also occurs in some neighbouring countries; late Byzantine Empire, medieval Epirus, etc. The usual Latin forms are "despotes" or "despota", 1st declension like "nauta". <font face="Gill Sans">[[Usor:Andrew Dalby|Andrew]]<font color="green">[[Disputatio Usoris:Andrew Dalby| Dalby]]</font></font> 08:39, 13 Iulii 2010 (UTC)
Only his father was named Stjepan Tomaš. The son's name was Stjepan Tomašev''ić''. In Latin, the father is obviously Stephanus Thomas, while the son called himself Stephanus Thomae. If that is not clear enough, I propose moving the article back to Stephanus Tomašević, as he never used an ordinal. How about changing the lead sentence to "Stephanus Thomae (Bosnice: Stjepan Tomašević) fuit ultimus Bosniae rex. Stephanus Thomas rex Bosniae et Voiacsicza erant parentes eius"? That way there would be no confusion between Stephanus Thomae and "Stephani Thomae".
If despotes is more correct, we should use that; sources seem to use both (though despotus is much more common[http://www.google.com/search?hl=bs&tbo=1&tbs=bks%3A1&q=%22despotes+Rasciae%22][http://www.google.com/search?hl=bs&tbo=1&tbs=bks%3A1&q=%22despotus+Rasciae%22]). [[Usor:Amsal|Amsal]] 10:03, 13 Iulii 2010 (UTC)
| |||