Discussione:Impero spagnolo

Impero spagnolo
Argomento di scuola secondaria di II grado
Materia	storia
Dettagli
Dimensione della voce	40 817 byte
Progetto Wikipedia e scuola italiana

Nello specifico:

[1] L'articolo è carente e superficiale per la trattazione puramente cronologica dello sviluppo dell'impero spagnolo. Si veda per confronto, la voce Spanish Empire nella wikipedia inglese [1] o la voce impero portoghese e impero britannico nella wiki italiana. Tra l'altro il titolo impero spagnolo, piu' omogeneo con le altre voci (vedi sopra), più equilibrato (per l'accezione negativa del termine imperialismo) e interwiki, esiste solo come redirect per questa voce, mentre dovrebbe essere il titolo principale della voce.

[2] Viena fatta molta enfasi sulla soppressione violenta di popolazioni (che fu sicuramente esistente, ma non fu l'unica causa del tracollo degli amerindi), ma quasi solo su quello (tralasciando tutta la parte relativa alle esplorazioni geografiche e il mutamento di prospettive culturali,religiose, sociali e politiche in Europa e nelle americhe stesse) e con più di una imprecisione.

[3] assenti bibliografia e fonti.

--Nanae 15:11, 6 lug 2006 (CEST)

Sono sostanzialmente d'accordo. Ieri ho modificato il titolo e ho inserito - da tradurre e, all'occorrenza, integrare con quanto è già stato scritto - il testo della voce inglese, che mi sembra abbastanza ampio. Secondo me, è meglio conservare l'avviso NPOV fino alla fine dell'opera di traduzione e integrazione e, quindi, non l'ho tolto. --Duroy 11:15, 25 ago 2006 (CEST)

Ho tradotto un pezzo e mi sono accorto della duplice presenza nascosta di un articolo inglese e uno in italiano. A questo punto tenere una versione dell'articolo inglese vecchia di due mesi è inutile se nessuno si prende la briga di tradurre e integrare il tutto. Quindi rimuovo tutta la parte non tradotta. --Snowdog (Arbeit macht Administratoren!) 23:54, 1 nov 2006 (CET)

C'e' un errore nel testo: lo spagnolo non e' affatto una delle 4 lingue dell'Unione Africana (inglese, francese, arabo, portoghese).

La voce non mi sembra così sbilanciata, nel senso che come ricostruzione storica tocca sinteticamente tutti i principali punti storici, geografici ed economici. Anche le note relative alla violenza coloniale mi sembrano tutto sommato coerenti con l'enormità dei massacri operati effettivamente dagli europei nelle fasi iniziali dei processi coloniali. Veneziano- dai, parliamone! 17:57, 13 giu 2008 (CEST)

Tolgo la segnalazione di POV, vecchia di due anni e relativa ad una voce sostanzialmente diversa da quella attuale, integrata da parti delle versione inglese. Fonti e bibliografia mancano ancora, ma non mi sembrano inerenti al POV. --Pier ^«···» 14:05, 17 lug 2008 (CEST)

Mappa errato del Impero spagnolo

Ciao a tutti! Scusati mi ma il mio italiano non è sufficiente per tradurre tutto ciò che segue correttamente. I'm writing to warn about several anachronous maps of the Spanish Empire (File:Spanish Empire.png, File:Spanish Empire(Total Expansion).jpg, File:Spanish Empire.png and File:Spanish colonization of the Americas.png) that present a huge error and can be considered a breach of the Neutral point of view policy, in that they include in the possessions of the Spanish Empire the colonial possessions of the Portuguese Empire during the period of personal union of the crowns known as the Iberian Union, from 1580 to 1640.

This inclusion is profoundly wrong, and at the English wiki there was an enourmous debate about this issue (see en:Talk:Spanish Empire), that resulted in the correct choice of excluding the Portuguese possessions from the maps of the Spanish Empire. In fact, only in the Spanish wiki, and on the ones were basically Spanish editors place the aforementioned maps, can one find those maps.

As I'm sure you know, the word Spain does not refer, in the 15th to the 17th centuries, to a unified state. Spain, or its counterparts in other modern languages, means the modern country of Spain - it was not so in the past, were it was a word, derived from the Latin Hispania, that meant the whole of the Iberian Peninsula (which includes, besides Spain, Portugal, Andorra, Gibraltar and French Cerdagne). This changes accured because of the historical processes of Castillian expansionism and hegemony over the centuries (ask not only the Portuguese, but also the Galicians, the Basques or the Catalans...), tried to monopolize the definition of Iberia in a way that satisfied its imperial interests. In fact, even if Spain was used in ancient times to refer to the whole of Iberia, today it is not. One of the first steps in the creation of the modern country of Spain was the union of Castille and Aragon in 1492, but this did not meant that it was then a united state - that only occured when the first Bourbon king Philip V of Spain united Castile and Aragon into a single state, abolishing many of the regional privileges (fueros) in the 18th century.

The question is, regarding the maps of the Spanish Empire, that the Kings of Portugal were for a period of 60 years the same kings as Castille and Aragon, but Portugal never stoped being an independent country. Therefore, the "Spanish Empire" in the 16th and 17th centuries was the empire of the crowns of Castille (basically in the Americas) and Aragon (these last were mainly small parts of Europe) - but not the Portuguese Empire which maintained its autonomy, even if the kings were the same in a dual monarchy (we are speaking of the dynasty known in Spain as the Habsburgs or the "Austrias", and in Portugal as the Philippine Dynasty or Portuguese House of Habsburg: Philip I of Portugal (II of Spain), Philip II of Portugal (III of Spain), Philip III of Portugal (IV of Spain)).

Notice that during this period Portugal was not a part or subrdinated to Castille (not the mention the then non-existent institutional reality of Spain, a mere geographical reference at that time). Portugal kept being an independent realm, with its own laws and administration, including most of the elite political and military personal, tax borders were maintained between Portugal and Castille, the flag was not changed, etc.

The Habsburgs had been accepted and chosen by acclamation as Portuguese kings by the General-States of the Kingdom ("Cortes do Reino") held in the city of Tomar in 1581 (see also 1580 Portuguese succession crisis). They never invaded the country, even if Castillian and Portuguese troops were used against the Portuguese troops of another pretender to the throne, and illegitimate descendent of a former king called António, Prior of Crato (see War of the Portuguese Succession).

We can, at this time and after the union, speak of an Habsburg Empire, that was in fact a Spanish-Portuguese Empire, constituted by two empires with enourmous autonomy and separation, but both belonging to the Habsburg Dynasty. The question here is not one of formal or juridical details, but one of real separation between the two empires.

By all these reason, and others one I shall mention down below, the territories of the Portuguese Empires CAN NOT be included in an anachronous map of the Spanish Empire. I repeat, Portugal was never a part of a then non-existent Spanish State, it remained a separate crown and kingdom within the Habsburg realms, and, furthermore, no other of those realms, with the exception of Castille, possessed a Global Empire (that maintained itself after the dynastyc rupture in 1640 - see Portuguese Restoration War) with whom Spain (Castille and Aragon) had had the necessity of signing the Treaty of Tordesillas (1494), which divided the newly discovered lands outside Europe into an exclusive duopoly between the Spanish and the Portuguese, due to the extension of their respective colonial domains.

Again, the autonomy or separation between both empires was not merely formal. See what the article in the Spanish Wikipedia says about the Spanish-Portuguese Empire (my translation, my bolds):

Philip of Spain ended up by being recognized as king of Portugal in the Cortes de Tomar in 1581. Meanwhile the idea of losing independence gave place to a revolution commanded by António, Prior de Crato (...). The Prior de Crato ended up being defeated chiefly due to the support given to Philip by the Portuguese bourgeoisie and tradicional aristocracy. To achieved to supports, Philip comited himself to maintaining the laws, traditions and privileges of the Portuguese. The same would occur with the ones occupying position in the central and local administration, as well as the military in the fleets of Guinea and India. (...) This was the begining of the personal union that would last until 1620 without relevants changes(...).

The rules of Philip I and Philip II of Portugal were relatively peacefull, chiefly because there was little Spanish interference en the matters concerning Portugal, which continued under Portuguese administration and governement.

This situation would start changing from 1620/1630 onwards, under Phlip III, and that would lead to the change in dynasty, with the acclamation as king of Portugal of the head of the House of Braganza in 1640.

Spanish and Portuguese Empires during the Iberian Union

In this sense the Portuguese Empire was never included in the Spanish one! And a map of both empires during the precise dates of the Iberian Union already exists!'

Have any of you ever seen a map of the Spanish Empire, particularly an anachronous map!, that included the Portuguese Empire, without it being these ones made by users in some wikiproject?

See what the following historian, in credible sources, have to say about this:

• Henry Kamen, "Empire: How Spain Became a World Power, 1492-1763" [2]: "After the union of the crowns of Portugal and Spain in 1580... Spain found itself in the difficult position of having to respect Portuguese primacy in major areas of commercial enterprise. Philip II promised the Cortes at Tomar in 1580 that he would scrupulously preserve the independence of his new realm. The monarchy, he stressed, was a union of free and autonomous states that operated separately. There is no doubt that the King did his best to maintain the autonomy of Portugal. In practice, however, the interests of Spain and Portugal became closely intertwined, thanks in good measure to the Portuguese financiers who entered the service of the Spanish crown."
• Stanley G. Payne[3]: There was never any question of the institutional incorporation of Portugal into the Castilian system of government. The union of crowns was carried out strictly on the basis of the system that prevailed in the Spanish Habsburg empire, the Aragonese federative system of separate principalities. Felipe II swore not to interfere in the laws, customs, or system of government of Portugal and not to appoint Spaniards to Portuguese offices. This pledge was largely respected during the reigns of Felipe II and Felipe III, and even afterward under Felipe IV, so that the kingdom and its overseas empire remained completely separate and essentially autonomous under the Hispanic crown.
• Asia in the Making of Europe By Donald F. Lach, Edwin J. Van Kley [4] : "According to the agreement signed by the King at Tomar in April, 1581, Portugal was left with substantial control over its own administration and its own overseas empire...While continuing to govern their own empire, the Portuguese were permitted to travel within the Spanish empire and to trade freely in Spain itself. The Portuguese were not to trade or settle in the Spanish empire; an idential prohibition applied to the Spanish with respect to the Portuguese empire."
• European Colonialism from Portuguese Expansion to the Spanish-America War By Hart, Jonathan Locke, Jonathan Hart [5] "From about 1600 onward, the Dutch, who were in the process of a long break with Spain while Portugal had drawn closer in an Iberian union, created great problems worldwide for the Portuguese empire... In the final years of the sixteenth century the Dutch attacked Iberian colonies, while Spain and Portugal were united under Philip in an arrangement that prohibited Spaniards from settling or trading in the Portuguese empire and the Portuguese from doing the same in the Spanish empire."
• Early Latin America: A History of Colonial Spanish America and Brazil By James Lockhart, Stuart B. Schwartz [6] "In 1580 the Spanish and Portuguese empires came under the joint rule of Philip II of Spain when the Portuguese Aviz dynasty died out. The two empires were kept administratively distinct, but the union did create problems and opportunities for both crowns."
• The History of Portugal By James Maxwell Anderson [7] "Felipe...swore not to meddle in the customs and laws of his new acquisition, to maintain the current system of government and not to appoint Spaniards to high office in Portugal, and, in general, this pledge was kept. The overseas empires of both nations remained separate."
• Spain and Its World, 1500-1700: Selected Essays Por J. H. Elliott [8]: p. 121 - "The Dutch had taken advantage of the truce (in 1609 with Spain) to penetrate the Portuguese colonial empire, with potentially grave repercussions for the delicate relationship between Castile and Portugal."
• The Penguin Atlas of Modern History : to 1815 by Colin McEvedy, "The World in 1600 - Political Units". [9]. "Philip II of Spain obtained the Portuguese crown in 1580. However the Spanish and Portuguese overseas Empires remained legally and actually distinct throughout the period of the union."

Notice that all these references, and much more can be obtained, always speak of the Portuguese and Spanish empires as distinct realities, even if in close connection between 1580-1640. In fact the Philips are always treated in modern historiography as Kings of Spain AND Portugal (which implies the separation of both realities). See:

• The Grand Strategy of Philip II By Geoffrey Parker [10] "At his coronation as king of Portugal in 1581...".
• The Colonial Spanish-American City: Urban Life in the Age of Atlantic Capitalism By Jay Kinsbruner, [11] "he was also the king of Portugal".
• England and the Spanish Armada: The Necessary Quarrel By MR James McDermott [12], "Philip II, as King of Portugal".
• Portuguese Oceanic Expansion, 1400-1800 By Francisco Bethencourt, Diogo Ramada Curto [13] "the King of Portugal, Philip II (Philip III of Spain)".

Again, do you know any map that showns both empires as being just Spanish? And notice that according to the Verifiability policy if you find a single map, even if from a credible source, that is not enough - it is necessary to demonstrate that there is a relative consensus amongst modern historians that the Portuguese and Spanish empires were, between 1580 and 1640, just called the Spanish Empire, as if the Portuguese Empire misteriously had vanished for 60 years. Were are the credible sources regarding the "Spanish colony of Brazil" or the "Spanish colony of Macau"? You will not find them, because these and others colonies always remained Portuguese.

See what the introduction to the article Spanish Empire in Encarta says [14]:

• "At its greatest extent in the Americas, Spanish territory stretched from Alaska through the western United States, Mexico, and Central America to southern Chile and Patagonia, and from the state of Georgia south to the Caribbean islands, Venezuela, Colombia, and Argentina." (There is no mention of Brazil!)
• "In Africa, at various times Spain occupied territories in the Western Sahara (present-day Morocco), and along the coast of what is now Equatorial Guinea, including the offshore island of Fernando Póo (now Bioko)." (There is no mention of the territories that would become Guinea-Bissau, Cape Verde, Mozambique, Angola, São Tomé and Príncipe)
• "In Asia, Spain ruled the Philippine Islands, which the Spanish named after King Philip II in 1542." (There is no mention of Malaca, Macau, Goa, Daman and Diu, East Timor)

And regarding maps:

• The maps by Shepherd in The Age of discovery 1340-1600 [15]; The Spread of Colonization, 1600-1700 [16] - both maps cover the period of the Iberian Union and one can not find any indication that the Portuguese Empire was included in the Spanish one during 60 years.
• A map from the period (1587)[17]. One can see Brazil (Bresilia) as Portuguese territory (Lusitanis).
• Another map, by Mercator in his 1595 Atlas[18], says Brasilia a Portogale (Brazil to Portugal).
• A different strategy is adopted in the Penguin Atlas of World History [19] p. 242 - both empires are shown as just one, but are called Spanish-Portuguese Colonial Empire.
• The same publishing house, however, in The Penguin Historical Atlas of the Pacific[20], and The Penguin Atlas of African History[21] shows both empire as clearly distinct.
• Another map by renown historian en:C. R. Boxer in his The Dutch Seaborne Empire[22] - p. 101 - called "Dutch conquests in the West Indies and Brazil" - Bahia is marked as Portuguese, during the time of the Dutch incursions in 1624 (in the period of the union).

If we want maps with a precise historical date for the period of the Iberian Union, then, of course, Portuguese colonies must be represented side by side with the Spanish ones, in different colours but stating both empires to be Habsburg territories.

An completely different things is the drawing of an ANACHRONOUS map of the Spanish Empire (1492-1898) - Of course during 60 years Portugal was an Habsburg realm! But these maps are not about the territories of the Habsburgs between 1580 and 1640, but of the Spanish Empire from the 15th to the 19th century!!

There are no credible academic sources that present a map or any other sort of indication that the Portuguese Empire was part of the Spanish Empire. These maps look like an attempt to artifically enhance the extent of the Spanish Empire in Wikipedia. Since when did Brazil, Angola, Mozambique, Cape Verde, Macau, Goa, Ceylon, Malaca, Cabinda, Timor, Bombaim, etc., were Spanish!?!? Even during the Iberian Union they were refered to in Spain as "las colonias portuguesas" (the Portuguese colonies)! If the objective is to have an anachronous map with all the Spanish colonies in any given historical period, then including the colonies of a different and independent country (then and now) that was only for a brief period of 60 years in a personal union of the crowns with Spain, colonies that if included in the Spanish map would almost double the area controled by Spain, amounts to a fictional enlargement of the Spanish Empire.

The designation "Spanish Empire", as the credible sources state, only pertains to the territories that once belonged to the crowns of Castille, Aragon or the modern Spanish state, not the Portuguese territories. The colonial ensemble during the Iberian Union WAS NEVER called Spanish Empire. That is way these wrong maps must be replaced by a correct map such as File:Spanish Empire-World Map.png. Thank you all. The Ogre (msg) 21:34, 29 ago 2008 (CEST)