Talk:Most Serene Republic

Untitled

I deleted "(Latin Regnum Serenissima)" because that cannot be correct. It must be either "Regnum Serenissimum" or maybe "Res publica serenissima" or something like "Regnum Serenissimae Poloniae/Venetiae" or so, but Latin grammar does not accord with what was written there. Is there anyone who knows what is correct? Buncic 16:49, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I thought (Classical) Latin for "republic" was respublica, one word. (It's one of those nouns with irregular conjugations that every student of Latin learns.) However, I see little value in keeping it in the article, especially as no source has been offered for the authentic Latin form, so I've removed it entirely. The term in the relevant languages (Latin/Italin/Polish) ought to go in the relevant articles, but it's superfluous on a disambiguation page. --Blisco 22:31, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Both respublica and res publica are correct in Latin. --DelvecchioSimone12 5 96 (talk) 18:28, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

P.S.: respublica and res publica have not an irregular conjugation, they have a feminine declension, conjugations are for verbs. --DelvecchioSimone12 5 96 (talk) 18:32, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

Where does the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth get its "Most Serene" title from? It's not called anything like than in Polish or any of other listed languages except English. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.35.64.14 (talk) 13:06, 24 April 2009 (UTC)

In the case of Venice, I thought that the appellative Serenissima (which translates actually to Very Serene, not Most Serene) was due to the fact that they could not be attacked by land (being an archipelagos of small islands) and that they had a strong navy, so that there was very little risk of invasion or attack, and therefore, their life was quiet and without worries. The Italian Wikipedia page about the Republic of Venice states that the name "Serenissima" comes, at least in part, out of the superb administration of Justice, which granted a quiet and fair life to all. Anyone out there has sources about this? Mnlg (talk) 09:48, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

"Most Serene" is an indicator of sovereignty, i.e. an independent country.

'Republic' is just an description of the form of government exercising juridical rights in a geographical unit, e.g. a specific town or region can be a "republic" if the magistrates & judges of that area are appointed by an elected council of its inhabitants, rather than being appointed by a feudal lord, count, bishop or monarch.

But having a "republican" government does not necessarily imply supreme jurisdiction. If the law is such that a case brought before the republic's courts has a right of appeal for review by a higher authority, e.g. to a the courts of a duke or monarch or emperor, then the republic is not, by definition, "sovereign". Or, more bluntly, it is not an independent state, at least not de jure.

"Most Serene" is the customary courtesy reserved to sovereigns and sovereigns only. "Most Serene Prince" or "Most Serene Highness" necessarily means a lord with supreme jurisdiction, i.e. a sovereign king.

You can call any lowly knight or count "Most Illustrious", or "Most Valorous" or "Most Honorable" or "Most Excellent" or what you will, but you can never call them "Most Serene". It would be a scandalous breach of established courtesies.

I am not sure how that came about, or why 'serenity' rather than some other term was chosen to be the exclusive sovereign courtesy. Perhaps because only a sovereign can judge without fear of reversal, that his judgment cannot be reversed or perturbed, i.e. 'serene'? That's speculation. I really don't know. All I know is that it happens to be the customary usage (although that courtesy got messed around after the Renaissance, when monarchs took to taking up new courtesies such as "royal" and "majesty". But prior to that, pick up any letter or petition addressed to a sovereign, it will almost always open with the courtesy, e.g. "To the most serene prince Edward, by the grace of God, king of Fredonia.")

Consequently, the "Most Serene" appellation was also used by republics like Venice to make it utterly clear that they are not merely republics (form of government), but specifically [i]sovereign[/i] republics, and thus independent states, i.e. their jurisdiction is supreme, there is no appeal above their courts, no review by any royal or emperor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Walrasiad (talk • contribs) 10:35, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Latin (and Italian) adjective Serenissima is an absolute superlative (as Much Serene in English), not the relative suparlative (as Most Serene in English)

The translation of Latin Serenissima (which is an absolute superlative, not the relative superlative) is Very Serene or Much Serene (depending by context), not Most Serene (which is the relative superlative).

(The) Most Serene is the translation of Latin relative superlative Plurima Serena (the true relative superlative), not of the interfix -issim- (which creates a graduate scale of absolute superlatives such as Much Serene and Very much serene).

So the title of this page is incorrect and all pages referring to states containing in their Latin names "Serenissima res publica" or "Serenissima respublica" (or in their Italian names "Serenissima repubblica") should be substituted by "Much Serene Republic".

--DelvecchioSimone12 5 96 (talk) 18:25, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

I've reverted the change back to "most serene" for several reasons. First, "much serene" is simply ungrammatical in English. Second, although "serenissima" in modern Romance languages such as Italian or Spanish is indeed the absolute superlative, which would normally be translated as something like "very serene" or "extremely serene" rather than "most serene", in Latin, as opposed to modern Romance, the -issim- construction can be relative or absolute (see, e.g., https://blogs.transparent.com/latin/latin-adjectives-ii/; p. 258 of The Mere Bones of Latin; p. 129-131 of A History of the Spanish Language; pp. 126-142 of Diachronic Variation in Romanian). In any event, the distinction in English is not so clear cut, and "serenissima" has traditionally been translated as "most serene". For example, news articles and official government statements universally state "The Most Serene Republic of San Marino", e.g., https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sanmarino-sb/factbox-five-facts-most-serene-republic-of-san-marino-idUSTRE57G0GM20090817, https://slate.com/human-interest/2011/08/san-marino-the-world-s-oldest-republic.html, https://it.usembassy.gov/u-s-ambassador-italy-ambassador-designate-san-marino-lewis-eisenberg/, https://it.mfa.lt/it/en/news/lithuanian-ambassador-to-italy-presented-credentials-to-the-director-general-of-the-food-and-agriculture-organization-of-the-united-nations_1.

Talu42 (talk) 16:45, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

---

This subject is a large confusion, as I noticed in the english forced translation on Republic Of Venice "formally known" as La Serenissima, not as "most serene". However I really find inappropriate to flatten all the meaning in a funnel like all the reasons why a name all come to one same shared reason. This is totally wrong. The reasons why Venzia had this title differ from another, and however a reasearch would be needed to offer the foundations to say that all used this for saying one same thing, this title wasn't used in the same way, for the same reason, we already know this. I really disagree with what Wikipedia is doing here which seems more what a bot would do than what an Encyclopedia working over a Cultural Goods and Human Heritage would do.

I really need to see Wikipedia investing in Cultural Curators not in average people treating all the entries as the same thing, this is not what an Enyclopedia would do. Maybe Bar \ Pub talk does this. I find offensive putting in parallel these titles which could be done only for the purpose of reasearch but cannot be the end, it must be a mean. If the parallelism is the end we haven't understood nothing of Cultural goods, Heritage is there to make us Wonder not to remove the doubt and give certainties, if ever they meant the same thing it means one should be held as leader of starting this, and this should be written in the Wikipedia entry because if all make use in the same way then it is important to state who started this and how this has changed (which however I doubt deeply since it's impossible that all used this due to someone using for the first time, and even if we all know how great was Venezia or others too). The titles anyway remain unique in their own languages and in many cases cannot be translated since all the languages have different roots and different meanings (EDIT: strangely enough I found this matter also felt by another user and this is not just a case, it's because we clearly have both studies in these Humanities and translation is a tool that must be used carefully anyway), some have the luck of owning shades that other don't have and this is the case for all these languages involved here, and this goes lost in translation big time if we choose to translate a title which was working in the original version anyway not in a translated way since that title was used abroad in the original language (this is sure). IT IS NOT at least for Venice a title that uses common adjective, it's between proper noun and adjective while instead these titles "now sculpted in stone" of "most serene" seem to say that this is a common noun given to cities\communities\states ... it's not the case at least for Venice. La Serenissima is how the city is formally known. It's like this was the name of a city, but it's not a name, nor an adjective. I find this arbitrary semplification really rude and insensible. The way the Republic of Venice, was and is formally known is not "the most serene or the very serene or whatever clam and serene" it's "La Serenissima". You don't translate such a noun... I really can't understand how this is possible to happen. I understand this can sound like taste but I believe it's not relative to "taste" only.

In Italian the adjective actually doesn't have AT ALL a literal meaning, also this reason removes a reason to translate because this actually leads to wrong directions: Nor the Doge or Venice was serene, the meaning is not closer with a translation, it actually gets even further than where it could be if we jumped searching for it from the original version.

In the Republic Of Venice article it is written that Venice was Formally known as The Most Serene, it is just an error: in a translation you don't also translate the proper noun because if you do so you are actually saying nothing. It's simply counter intuitive! Formally known as la Serenissima is not COMMON, this idea that the title is common and all mean the same thing is just a huge digital pastiche... please avoid Bots do run Wikipedia. This is cultural Heritage not waste management. Albero1 18:23Z 30 July 2020