Talk:Spanish Empire
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is part of WikiProject Spain which aims to to expand and organise information better in articles related to the history, languages, and cultures of Spain. Please participate by editing the article, or visit the project page for more details. |
[edit] Archives
[edit] Portugal was never part of the spanish empire - again and again
People, you might like it or not, but Portugal and its colonies were never part of the spanish empire. When Philip II of Spain was acclaimed Philip I of Portugal (legally, so it was not an invasion [although some portuguese didn't want the new dynasty and fought]) one of the conditions was remaining Portugal separate, as a personal union. So when that happened Portugal was not absorved into Spain, Portugal and Spain remained two independent separate countrys, just with the same king and obviously politics. So, Spanish empire never had the portuguese possessions but the spanish king had both empires. That's the diference that people seem to confuse. When Philip IV of Spain and III of Portugal wanted to absorb Portugal into Spain there was a war for DYNASTIC INDEPENDENCE, not for separation of the two countries. Of course we might not neglect the pro-spanish thinking of the kings, they were spanish in origin, so we might say that Portugal was under spanish influence, but independent.
That map shows not the spanish empire but the possessions of the king of Spain AND Portugal. You can call it the Philipine empire, the Portuguese-Spanish empire, etc, but with the lands included it is NOT ONLY the spanish empire.--Câmara 15:13, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
The legend in the portuguese empire page is good. It shows the same map but it says: "An anachronous map showing the Portuguese possessions ruled by the Habsburg kings (1580-1640) jointly all Spanish colonies (1492-1975), shown together simultaneously and at their maximum extent."
Depends how you define this empire - see the "Definition". Also read the "Empire" article on the heterogenous nature of the organisation of empires. You are right about the Dynastic Independence - in a technical legalistic sense, yet in reality it was one empire, as it was effectively under one ruler - and Portugal was conquered and occupied by Spanish forces. For an analogy think about how the Warsaw pact was in reality part of the Soviet empire, inspite of the official independence of its member states. Of course it might be better to call it the Spanish-Portuguese-Aragonese- Bergundian empire - all a bit of a mouthful. As it was the "Spanish" part that was the dominant one its easiest to call it the Spanish, but in our nationalistic era this seems to cause misunderstandings. Maybe we should clarify these issues a little more in the Definition, so that people understand better the nature of this distinctly Renaissance era empire, with its diffuse authorities and its evolving nature. But lets not get lost too much in technicalities, we could go on and on Provocateur 23:37, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- There's a better comparison from the same period: Tudor re-conquest of Ireland. A seperate crown for Ireland was set up by legislation in 1541, which probably gives a weaker claim than that of Phillip II over Portugal. It's still a matter of debate whether Ireland was a kingdom or a colony, part of the British Empire or a territory to be exploited.--Shtove 23:33, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Who are you people? have you read any academic books on this period?
after reading the first few discussions i wondered to my self...... do any of you go to a university that teaches about the Spanish empire? i do go to a university that teaches exactly this which i have the benifit to be able to obtain relevant books on this topic at the library. Spain was truly a global empire, someone please pick up a book and read it first - preferably one by the leading academics in this field such as Henry Kamen, Hugh Thomas and of course Geoffrey Parker. i am pretty sure that Henry Kamen explains how large the spanish empire really was in his book 'Kamen, H, Empire: How Spain became a world power: 1492 - 1763' though i cant be bothered at the moment finding it but i will post it up here later when i have time. but i think i will add something very interesting to this discussion. according to the book "the Grand Strategy of Phillip II" by geoffrey Parker the very words "The world is not enough" comes from the Latin words of "non sufficit orbis" which was inscribed on a bronze medal (coin) in 1583 commemorating the creation of Phillips global empire. This is shown on page five and if anyone has the book you will see the medal has a picture of phillip on one side and a picture of the world with a horse on top of it on the other with the words "NON SUFFICIT ORBIS" situated around the world. Truly, spain was one of those empires that was enormous but i will try and get exact details on how big it is compared to the roman empire which i think is in another book i have.
I think you will find also that there were movements by the catholic orders to promote equal treatment of native Indians and laws were passed though its been a long time since i read about that so i can only be very vague about it as i also have to read up on it. unsigned comment by User:203.206.255.133 on 09:52, August 2, 2006
===>Thanks? That's not helpful. If you have some actual evidence to cite, please do. -Justin (koavf), talk, mail 14:03, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Western Sahara was not Spanish until 1884
Western Sahara was awarded to Spain in 1884 at the Berlin Conference, so the sentence
"Spain lost all the colonial possessions in the first third of the century, except for Cuba, Puerto Rico and, isolated on the far side of the globe, the Philippines, Guam and nearby Pacific islands, as well as Spanish Sahara (mostly desert), parts of Morocco, and Spanish Guinea."
must be rewritten. Same applies to "parts of Morocco", which weren't Spanish until 1906 (Algeciras Conference), unless you consider that these "parts of Morocco" are Ceuta and Melilla, which is even more controversial.
- Ifni was claimed by Spain since the 16th century and recognized by Morocco from 1859. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.26.120.40 (talk) 16:46, 23 December 2006 (UTC).
[edit] Small addition
I have made this small addition: , "enacting the most extraordinaty epic in human history, in the words of the prominent French historian Pierre Vilar", but user Merc has reverted it. What is wrong with that?.Veritas et Severitas 03:28, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
Well, I am ging to be very rigorous with my sources:
Pierre Vilar Histoire de L'Espagne 21st Edition ISBN 2 13 051585 1
Page: 33.
Original text in French: ...la plus extraordinaire epopee de l'histoire humaine.
So I am introducing this small addition again.Veritas et Severitas 18:20, 3 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] The Flag
The flag reported as the flag of New Spain is not so. This flag is known as "Cruz de Borgoña" (Cross of Burgundy), and, according to Santiago Dotor, from Flags of the World, was the Spanish military flag from the 16th century up to 1843, when the colours of the 1785 War Ensign were adopted for use on land too. So it may have been used in New Spain as well as in any territory within the Spanish Empire as flag of the Army. Archael Tzaraath 14:51, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
- That's exactly correct (I added the image as "Flag of the Spanish Empire"). Feel free to change the caption to your liking. Albrecht 14:53, 6 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Articles for Deletion
FYI, for anyone interested there are two AFD discussions going on at
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The first European colonization wave (15th century-19th century)
- Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Second European colonization wave (19th-20th century) Gsd2000 11:40, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Spain had the greatest empire in modern history
The best of Spain undisputably dominated Amsterdam, Belgium, Rome, Sicily and the most noteworthy Peru empire and Aztec empire at the same timeline. It took at least 3 super powers and 2 centuries ago to stop them
The best of Britain and France are not close that good
—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.161.34.61 (talk • contribs).
- I hadn't realised colonialism was something to be proud of. --Brian Fenton 08:45, 13 October 2006 (UTC)
madrid did win the best sport club of the 20th century so colonialism is not the worst thing to be proud of. For example U.K should give Gilbratar back to Spain, that is the worst hing to be proud of
- And Olivença? Spain promised and signed that Olivença would return to Portugal. Until now, nothing. Colonialism may be something to be proud of if we recognize that are some unacceptable colonialisms (slavery, etc). It's a complicated subject, I think.Câmara 18:19, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
Gibraltar is a part of the UK's Empire, but come on, that happened 300 years ago, Gibraltar in Spanish
- Gibraltar belongs to the Gibraltarians, who have no desire to be Spanish. It was liberated three hundred years ago. --Gibnews 22:12, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Territorial height
Wasn't the empire at its territorial height between 1580 and 1640, when it had control of Portugal and its empire? During that period it ruled basically the same areas it did in 1790, except for the central and most of the western US, which area was surpassed by that of Brazil and other Portuguese territories, probably. SamEV 23:41, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
- As Portugal maintained its independence, it's wrong to say the spanish empire included it.Câmara 18:08, 24 December 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Piracy attack
Sorry for my horrible english, but part of "God is Spanish" say that the piracy was dangerus for the Emperie economi. I have was study that information and I haven't found any author who say that (spanish and no spanish). Some pirates, like Drake, sometimes could get a few important ships; but that was a exception no the rule. That idea is more from Hollywood movies that History investigations.
[edit] First global empire
Both the page for the Portuguese Empire and the Spanish Empire say they were the first global empire. What's up with that? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.28.245.188 (talk • contribs).
- Well spotted. The Spanish Empire only went "global" (instead of a Europen-American affair) with the settlement of the Philippines, in 1565, by which time Portugal had established posts in Brazil, Africa, India and East Asia. So Portugal was "first". Gsd2000 00:13, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
