>>11905248>So what Im asking is why are modern basques following a language that by all admissions is a XIX century invention made up by romanticists influences, setting aside all the historical approachment their ancestors had undegone over the previous millenia.I think I haven't explained myself correctly. Modern day basque (batua in this case) is just the current version of the language, just like any other language evolves through out history. Take english for example; how it was written and spoken in the 15th century isn't the same way it's spoen and written in the 21st century, yet it's the same language.
>It was so inconvenient and impractical that by the low middle ages that the region of Vizcaya adopted standard castillian and never looked backThat is, in part, due to the incorporation of Viscay into the kingdom of Castille. Basque was still spoken, but wasn't used in royal decrees and many important documents due to
A) The king of castille didn't know basque, so no point sending him a report in that tongue
B) There was, at certain occasion through history, the habit of trying to marginalize basque in order to homogenize the subjects (ie; make them all castillian). For example, when Castille conquered Navarre they imposed castillian as the official language (see "Navarra Estado Europeo by Tomás Urzainqui Mina).
Despite this, written records in basque do exist, the oldest being a love poem from the XVIth century;
https://www.thinkspain.com/news-spain/32561/poem-written-in-ancient-basque-is-earliest-known-example-of-spain-s-mystery-languageAnd here is another short article speaking about the basque language and it's origin;
https://www.bizkaiatalent.eus/en/pais-vasco-te-espera/senas-de-identidad/euskera-antigua-europa/So it was neither impractical nor is it made up
>But I dont consider these historically any greater in difference than Galicia or Toledo for e.g.The Kingdom of Navarre was a mayor player you know