Talk:Trás-os-Montes e Alto Douro Province

there is a mistake Afonso III was not son of Sancho II but is brother and takes the kingdom after a Civil War — Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.126.83.4 (talk) 14:47, 4 October 2015 (UTC)

It is rather foolish and dangerous to make an inpromtu correction; however, the following should be considered: it is indeed true that the Transmontan is, if not distrustful of outsiders, at least weary of them. This attitude is rather wise because outsiders --particularly the government in Lisbon-- from the humans registered in the Coa Upper Paleolithic rock art (ca. 25,000 years-plus ago) to the Napoleonic invaders came with one thing in mind: to pillage. The more recent, albeit representative example, inter alia, was the illegal expropration by the Salazar Government of the family aid remittances by the French Government on the behalf of Portuguese immigrants --at the time mostly Transmontans-- who were working in France. Such an act, inter alia, differs little from what we call theft. Recent statistics by INE show clearly that such acts had a nepharious impact on the province in terms of economic development; the province lags the rest of the country. The discrepancy becomes even more revealing when we compare economic development in Tras os Montes e Alto Douro (the rightful name of the Province) with the development in Azores, Madeira, or perhaps more appropriately with the advances we have seen in Galiza, a region in Spain we Transmontans have more in common --ethnically, culturally, linguistically, etc, than other areas in Portugal. Incidentally, don't you come with the dross of "patriotism", "Lusitanism", and other "isms" used to manipulate and exploit.

We Transmontanos and Alto Durienses have to take our destiny into our own hands if we want to reach the development of our Galician brothers across the border which erased by the EU, but which for us never existed. The urling of insults which we shall not degnify by mentioning them, serve only to stifen our backs and reinforce our aspirations of REINTEGRATION with our bethren in Greater Gallaecia. Remember the language known as Portuguese was, and is --together with Mirandes-- our language; theirs, was "Romanzo", the "language" of the Mozarabs (it had little impact). "Lack of planning"? which is supposedly attributed to a "Father Fontes"? -Wasn't Magellan a Transmontan? (vide Pigaffeta). Quote insted the lyricism of the Abade de Bacal. Or a Camilo Castelo Branco, or a Antero de Quental, or a Miguel Torga. Do no use a wonderful opportunity to bring history to the access of the masses to insult and offend. It is dishonorable and a misuse of resources,

---

Removed from the article:

The historical picture of the Transmontano is of one who is very mistrusting of strangers. According to Padre Fontes, the Transmontano “often feels himself being tricked. He is spontaneous, violent, rarely taking premeditated actions. He lives in a closed society, in small groups, without influence from other lands. There is monotony in life, in eating the same food, in love, in work, in everything. He accepts gossip as truth. Marriages between cousins and alcoholism cause many retarded children. The woman ages quickly in spirit, and in body”…”the man is a good payer. He won’t go to jail for robbery but for killing. Better to kill than to be a thief.”

There seems to be quite a bit of stereotyping going on in this article, and I think this quote is the worst of it. I think it really needs some more research and a check for NPOV. Can anyone help?

Stereotype

The last three paragraphs (from «The people of Tras-os-Montes, perhaps due to...» on) are just stereotypes. No informative value there. I suggest they are removed from the article.

True indeed, this article is quite stereotyped. Besides, things have changed a lot in Trás-os-Montes in the past few years and many of the stereotypes are now gone. I'll take the freedom to make some changes.--Húsönd 12:34, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

The last sentence (before the municipalities listing) is just stereotyping. There's no reason for such a thing on an Encyclopedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gazilion (talk • contribs) 15:52, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Language

I have made various attempts to improve the language of the article. My intention has never been to change the sense; if I have done so, I apologise, and it should be changed back. Further work is needed, particularly to the second paragraph, some of which I could not understand. Maproom (talk) 17:21, 27 April 2009 (UTC)