Talk:Expulsion of the Moriscos

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Spain (Rated C-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Catalan-speaking Countries
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Catalan-speaking Countries, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the history, languages, and cultures of Catalan-speaking Countries on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 

Figures...[edit]

I know there is some discussion about the precise numbers involved in this particular episode, but in places this gets confusing during the article - e.g. we have Castile listed as having 100,000 Moriscos, then later 32,000 leaving Castile, with 10,000 Moriscos left behind across the whole of Spain, which doesn't quite add up. I've got a couple of other sources which we could ref here to capture the slight spread between different writers - any other views on this one? Hchc2009 (talk) 23:39, 22 December 2009 (UTC)

That's mostly my work, and, uh, yeah. Good point, that needs to be fixed if we can find more sources. Most of those figures are from Lynch's book, but there are several other works to consult. In fact I saw a mass-market book on the topic published recently, though haven't read it - "Blood and Faith: The Purging of Muslim Spain." Will give it another look should I get a chance, but I suspect that the numbers are all "correct" but from different sources Lynch was consulting. Which means we should probably be replacing them with a range. SnowFire (talk) 01:38, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
I'll fish out the one's I've got later as well.Hchc2009 (talk) 08:08, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Children[edit]

...the exile was optional for children less than 4 years old. This was later expanded to 16 years of age

This is not quite consistent with the article Philip III of Spain, according to which

Philip paternalistically decreed that Morisco children under the age of seven could not be taken to Islamic countries

Were some of the Morisco children left behind in practice? What happened to these children?

Top.Squark (talk) 12:42, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Huh. Well, it's referenced in the Phillip III article, but as the one who mostly wrote this article, the 4-16 age mark is ref'd too (to Lynch). Weird. The only thing I can say is that the ref in the P3 article is newer (2005) than Lynch's book, so it's possible there's some updated scholarship here. I'd tentatively suggest that we should check some more sources to "vote" on which one seems more supported in the literature, but I personally don't have access to a good research library at the moment.
I will say that regardless of the official government position, it was pretty much moot. My impression is that almost nobody "took advantage" of the offer to leave their kids behind to be raised as Christians. Either the entire family left in exile, or the entire family stayed and pretended to be Old Christians. So there were very few Morisco children left behind to fend for themselves. SnowFire (talk) 13:48, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Citizenship for Morisco descendents[edit]

In reaction to the policy of Spain to facilitate access to Spanish citizenship by descendants of the Jews who were expelled from Spain, there has been demand from Muslims to apply a similar policy to the descendants of the Moriscos. In 2006 this demand received support from the parliament of Andalusia but has not gained broader support. Supporters consider the cases of the Muslims and Jews to be parallel; opponents argue that the Muslims were colonial oppressors while the Jews had a long history in Spain and were not part of the colonial power, so that, while the expulsion of the Jews was a matter of bigotry, the expulsion of the Muslims was a matter of decolonization. Other factors are the belief that while only small numbers of Jews would immigrate, large numbers of Muslims would, and that it is difficult accurately to identify Muslims whose ancestors were expelled from Spain.

That whole paragraph needs citation. Especially as the arguments (which I have no doubt some people make) are pretty nonsensical. At the time of the expulsion, the Moriscos were not Muslim, and there is no way they can be seen as "colonial oppressors". Iapetus (talk) 10:02, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Consequences[edit]

The expulsion of 4% of the population may seem minor, but it should be noted that the Morisco population was a larger part of the civilian workforce than their numbers would make seem. Practically no Moriscos were trusted to be noblemen, soldiers, or priests.

Does the expulsion of 4% of a population really "seem minor"? That's almost half a decimation, and (in a typical modern nation) equivilent to the loss of a decent-sized town. If the Moriscos were equally distributed across all classes, then that would presumably mean a 4% decline in economic output, which would be a major slump. So shouldn't the assessment actually be "The expulsion of 4% of the population may very serious, and was actually even worse because the Morisco population was a larger part of the civilian workforce..." Iapetus (talk) 10:13, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Hmm, how to put this. People are stupid? I agree, the loss of 4% of the population would be catastrophic. But it sounds small to many people even today, especially those who subscribe to the Lump of labor fallacy. They'd assume that most people getting kicked out are irrelevant underclass, and those that aren't would be quickly replaced, so if you had an unemployment average of say 4%, kicking out 4% of the population would result in only a temporary economic hit as some previously unemployed people take over the kicked-out people's jobs, and then the economy would continue on as before like nothing happened but with a 0% unemployment rate. It certainly seems the case that the Spanish government ministers of 1609 did not think this would be particularly catastrophic, although part of this (as noted in the article) is the fact that the people in charge were in Madrid, and the areas most adversely affected were Valencia & Aragon, so who cares about them. I agree this could possibly be rephrased to be harsher - not sure how without making it too wordy, though. Suggestions? SnowFire (talk) 19:39, 21 March 2014 (UTC)