|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Ferdinand Magellan article.|
|Archives: 1, 2|
|Ferdinand Magellan is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.|
|This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 31, 2004.|
|Ferdinand Magellan has been listed as a level-3 vital article in People. If you can improve it, please do. This article has been rated as C-Class.|
|This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. Click [show] for further details.|
|This article has an assessment summary page.|
|A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day... section on March 16, 2004, March 16, 2005, September 6, 2007, November 28, 2009, and November 28, 2010.|
- 1 Untitled
- 2 Please fix the Limasawa error, or at least acknowledge that the debate is ongoing.
- 3 Edit request
- 4 Claim To Fame
- 5 First Mass in the Philippines
- 6 Crossing the Pacific
- 7 18 survivors vs survivors onboard Victoria
- 8 Grammar!!!
- 9 Fernão de Magalhães
- 10 Edit Request: Star of Magalhães
- 11 Grammar and No Hyperlink
- 12 Antonio Pigafetta
- 13 Edit Request
- 14 Spanish nationality
- 15 Wrong date.
- 16 Dead link to cited source
- 17 Place of birth
- 18 Religion!!
- 19 "Overwintered"
- 20 Edit request on 7 September 2013
- 21 Edit request on 10 September 2013
- 22 Introduction and circumnavigation
- 23 How many crew?
- 24 Memorials
There's a mistake in his early life. Says his father died in 1500 but then says he was 10 (1490) when his parents died and he was made page — Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 10:25, 6 November 2012 (UTC)
Please fix the Limasawa error, or at least acknowledge that the debate is ongoing.
About Masao, "Mazaua" and Butuan vs. Limasawa, Leyte debate:
1. Updated sources indicate that explorer Antonio Pigafetta erroneously replaced "Mazaua" with "Buthuan" in his eye-witness accounts. Fleet records of onboard scholars also indicate that Magellan had also met with the native Kings of "Buthuan", Colambu and Siaiu.
2. The "Limasawa, Leyte" connection continually contested due to evidence that the Isle of Homonhon, Limasawa, Leyte does not geographically "have the suitable anchorage" or the accurate coordinates that Mazaua was described to have (N 9º 40). In klamth falls — Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 19:20, 12 February 2013 (UTC)
For more updated information on this debate and archeological/historic evidence to support: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_mass_in_the_Philippines
Due to obvious mispronunciation of the name of the discoverer in European Portuguese and differences in pronunciation of the name between European Portuguese and Brazillian Portuguese.
- Sorry, but as a native speaker of Portuguese, I must say that the current IPA pronunciation shown in the article is still wrong. And it doesn't help that there doesn't exist a universally-accepted usage of those symbols. The sound represented by the digraph "th" in the English word "they" does not exist in actual spoken Portuguese. 188.8.131.52 (talk) 01:16, 28 February 2014 (UTC)
Claim To Fame
To be the first to sail around the world successfully, even though technically only part of his crew..not including him..were the one who returned. It was still his voyage that made it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 19:01, 7 January 2010 (UTC)
- Did Columbus discover America? No; he didn't intend to discover it, he never landed on the mainland, and he maintained to his death that he'd reached India. Do we honor him anyway for his real achievements? Yes, while bearing in mind the genocide that followed.
- The same standard applies to Magellan. He didn't intend to sail around the world; his mission was to find a westward route to the Spice Islands. And he didn't even complete that quest. A great navigator and an effective (though not undisputed) leader, yes. But Filipinos call him an invader and a murderer. Pigafetta and the other survivors were the first "rounders." --Deangup (talk) 03:40, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
Above it was stated that: "Pigafetta and the other survivors were the first "rounders" Maybe, maybe not. Some experts think that Magellan went on Serraro's expedition to explore the Moluccas in 1511-1512 (see http://www.notablebiographies.com/Lo-Ma/Magellan-Ferdinand.html and http://library.thinkquest.org/C006522/exploration/magellan.php). This would have put him further east than where he died in the Philippines. Thus he could be considered to have completed the circumnavigation even if he didn't close the loop.Tony mendoza (talk) 04:46, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
First Mass in the Philippines
Last line of the first paragraph on the "Death" section, as quoted below:
"Members of his expedition became the first Spaniards to reach the Philippine archipelago, but they were not the first Europeans."
There is no mention of First Mass in the Philippines by the crew of Ferdinand Magellan's Armada de Molucca, as referenced here:
Maybe that last line should include such a reference, or at least a link to First Mass in the Philippines, for historical context.
ferdinand magellan was 2 years old when he went around the world
Crossing the Pacific
There is no mention of the crossing of the pacific, which apparently took over four months, and the crew almost starved to death.
18 survivors vs survivors onboard Victoria
Need to provide a source of the names of the survivor's list, since it doesn't exactly match the list of names I have seen on other sources.
The list of survivors does not match completely the list found in other sources. On this Wikipedia page, there is a Hans of Aachen (gunner) that is not found the list of survivors found the Wikipedia page of the sole returning ship Victoria. Victoria has listed a survivor "Martin de Isaurraga, of Bermeo, grumete of Concepcion", which does not seem to match any name on this page. In addition, the names of the two list don't always match - this page list a survivor "Antonio Hernández Colmenero, from Huelva, Mariner" while the same person on the Victoria list seems to be called "Antonio Rodriguez, of Huelva, marinero of Trinidad".
The list on the Victoria page matches the list I found on an online copy John Fiske "Discovery Of America", published in 1892. I am not sure what Mr. Fiske source was for the name. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk • contribs) 20:40, 20 May 2010
As per Gregorio Maranon ,director of Instituto de Cultura Hispanica, Francisco Alba was from Axios,greek island of Rodos and not from Roda,Galicia as mentioned here. Similary mr Maranon confirm that 2 seamans mentioned by you with origin from Roda,Galicia are from island of Rodos [see: ISBN 960-7267-15-X] 18.104.22.168 (talk) 09:03, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi! My teacher always told us that the possessive form of names that end with s should be spelled with 's (Chris's) In your article I saw that the possessive form of Columbus is spelled Columbus'. Please consider correcting this error. Thanks!!!
- Well, my teacher said that, for someone/something with an "s" at the end of the name, writing a possessive as, for example, Chris' or Chris's are both acceptable (but just putting the apostrophe at the end of the word was actually better, as "s's" just looks a bit awkward).22.214.171.124 (talk) 22:45, 23 September 2010 (UTC)
- For more info and the WP guideline on this, see Wikipedia:MOS#Possessives. If there is no violation of the guideline, this is not an error as far as WP is concerned. In that case, consensus should probably be obtained before making a change. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 10:55, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Fernão de Magalhães
Fernão de Magalhães can't be translated, "Ferdinand Magellan" is a wrong information, Albert Einstein name wasn't changed. A personal name identifies a specific unique and identifiable individual person. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 18:28, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Edit Request: Star of Magalhães
I´d like to add to the text that the star Acrux is known in portuguese as Estrela de Magalhães after Fernão de Magalhães. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 19:34, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
I think that too sometimes, but as a matter of fact, many things get renamed in different languages. (Lisboa->Lisbon, Köln->Cologne) and in this case it makes sense, because most non-portuguese speakers won't even be able to pronounce his name correctly if not for the simplified, yet incorrect, version. --184.108.40.206 (talk) 22:52, 23 January 2012 (UTC)
In the sentence, "In 1517 after a quarrel with king D. Manuel I, who denied his persistent demands to lead an expedition to reach the spice islands from west, he left for Spain." king should be capitalized. Also King D. Manuel I does not have a link to the page regarding this king. Lastly, it says "from west" in the sentence, while it should say "from the west".
- I rewrote this bit. I changed "from west" to read "from the east (i.e., while sailing westwards, seeking to avoid the need to sail around the tip of Africa), citing Mervyn D. Kaufman (2004). Ferdinand Magellan. Capstone Press. pp. 13. ISBN 9780736824873.. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 00:23, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
Quote from the article: "Antonio Pigafetta, related that Gaspar Quesada, the captain of Concepcion, was executed..." This seems to suggest that Pigafetta was executed, instead of Gaspar. Please change it to something like this: "Gaspar Quesada, the captain of Concepcion, was executed." 220.127.116.11 (talk) 02:38, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
- I made a few minor changes for clarity there. The distinction is being made that Pigafetta reported that only Quesada was executed, while another report said that another captain was also executed. -- Donald Albury 04:28, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
the Pacific wasn't named the peaceful sea by magellan, but by Vasco Nunez de Balboa
- No, Balboa called it Mar del Sur. -- Donald Albury 04:31, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
The article says he "obtained Spanish nationality in order to serve King Charles I of Spain". But King Charles of Spain was also the Holy Roman Emperor. Could you elaborate on that? If it was necessary to have spanish nationality to serve king Charles, as his kingdom spread from Central, Western, and Southern Europe, it really looks that something is not quite right.
One other thing that really looks weird is the "spanish nationality", in those days Spain was not a nation but the name of the Iberian Peninsula which included Portugal. As you can see this map spanish kingdoms included Portugal:  or here  . So to make it clear Spain was the same as Iberian Peninsula, not a kingdom or nation, but a geographic location. (it would be like confounding America the country(USA) and America the continent).
To finalise , to change nationality Magellan needed a "Carta de naturaleza", so what was the "naturaleza" (naturality) that he got? Aragonese, castilian, leonese? As in his own time there was not a country or kingdom called Spain, and as Charles V ruled other houses , could it be that Magellan got Austrian nationality? After all Charles V was Roman Emperor and Archduke of Austria. Could someone really clarify this? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 20:26, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
- Charles I of Spain began his reign on 23 January 1516. He was the ruler of Castile-León and Aragon simultaneously in his own right (not by marriage), hence he was the first king of Spain. When he authorized Magellan's voyage on 22 March 1518 he was only the king of Spain, not of the Holy Roman Empire nor of Portugal. He became Charles V, Holy Roman Emperor over a year later on 28 June 1519. He abdicated in 1556. The Iberian Union of Spain and Portugal began much later in 1580 (and ended in 1640). Manuel I was king of Portugal from 1495 to 1521, hence during Magellan's voyage. — Joe Kress (talk) 07:44, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
- I am not talking about the Iberian Union. In the time of Charles I there was no Spain as a kingdom, he could not just be king of Spain because he wanted. Spain was the Iberian peninsula and it included Portugal, that was the common knowledge. Have you seen any document where he called himself king of Spain? Here it speaks about the five Spains, five kingdoms:
- "There was a principle of equaltiy among the Christian kingdoms, which respect one another mutually and on occasion agreed upon the portions of the Reconquest to be carried out. The five were Leon, Castile, Navarre, Aragon and Portugal. They were accepted as a whole, very unlikely any other kingdom across the Pyrenees, as equivalent to Spain. The Five Kingdoms was a name that meant the same as “all Spain”, to the point that when the union of Castile had taken place and was irreversible, there was one kingdom less, the same expression continued to be used […]".  page 137
- As far as I know Filip IV used the title of "Rey de las Españas" (king of the Spains), that was accepted. Charles I of Castille did not use that title. Or can you show a document where he used that title? I never saw one.
- Only after the Iberian Union, the name Spain was used without Portugal (not considering the use in muslim times).
- Another thing that no one ever could make proof is the carta de naturaleza. If there is not one there is no change of nationality.
- You can read here the document that naturalized Diego Colon,in 1504, the brother of Cristovan Colon.  Why don´t we have the letter that naturalized Magellan? There had to be one. Naturalization was a hot topic in those days,in January of 1518 the Cortes de Valladolid made a petition to Charles I not to entrust cartas de naturaleza and revoke those he had already given, . pg 239 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 22.214.171.124 (talk) 20:03, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
- If you need a translation from spanish let me know. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 126.96.36.199 (talk) 20:13, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
- I found another document, that may clarify the notion of Spain: "the designation of king of the Spains gave great offense in Portugal where it has always contended that the term Spain must continue to comprehend, as it did before the Moorish invasion, the whole peninsula, which is now properly divided into Castille and Portugal"page 83 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.8.131.52 (talk) 20:26, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
In the wikipedias of Spanish languages, not a single reference to the change of nationality :
- Aragonés- Ferrando de Magallans (en portugués Fernão de Magalhães) estió un nabegant portugués naixito en Porto lo 1480 y muerto en Mactán, as Filipinas, o 1521.
- Asturianu- Fernão Magalhães (Oporto, Portugal, 1480 - Mactán, Filipines, 1521), foi un navegante portugués.
- Catalá- Fernão de Magalhães (conegut també com a Magallanes en castellà, Magellanus en llatí o Magellan en francès i anglès, entre d'altres variants), nascut al nord dePortugal, probablement a Ponte da Barca, al voltant del 1480 i mort a l'illa de Mactan (vora illa de Cebú, a les Filipines) el 27 d'abril de 1521, va ser un navegant i explorador portuguès de l'època dels grans descobriments.
- Castilian- Fernando de Magallanes, también conocido como Hernando de Magallanes (Sabrosa, Región Norte, Portugal, primavera de 1480 – Mactán, Filipinas, 27 de abril de 1521) (en portugués Fernão de Magalhães), fue un navegante portugués.
- Euskara- Fernão de Magalhães (portugesez) edo Fernando de Magallanes (gaztelaniaz) (Ponte da Barca, Minho, (Portugal) 1480ko udaberria-Mactán, Filipinak, 1521eko apirilaren 27a) nabigatzaile eta esploratzaile portugaldarra izan zen.
- Galego- Fernão de Magalhães, nado en Portugal en 1480 e finado en Filipinas en 1521, foi un navegante portugués coñecido porque, ao servizo do rei de España, baixo o nome de Fernando de Magallanes, foi o primeiro en cruzar o Estreito de Magalhães así como tamén o primeiro europeo en navegar por augas do Océano Pacífico.
Date is incorrect. It currently reads:
"Magellan's expedition of 1819–1822 became the first expedition to sail ..... "
Citation #26, Maps of the Magellan Strait and a brief history of Ferdinand Magellan, is no longer with us. If someone could fix this case of linkrot, I'm sure the project would be grateful.TheRealTeln (talk) 19:22, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
- It looks like a link to an online sample of a commercial map on a website which has been reorganized so that the former URL used in the article is no longer valid. From the description given in the link, it's not clear to me which of several maps seen here might be the one of interest. If the link is there in order to cite a source supporting an article assertion, an alternative supporting source might be better. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 01:23, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
Place of birth
The place of birth is either Porto (the same place of Henry, the Navigator) or Sabrosa. If you refer Sabrosa in the vignette, then you should explain more about it because the authenticity of the documentation used to support the claim is under dispute. His family lived in oporto so this is likely the POB. Sabrosa is a remote region in the Douro Valley where his family had a state and some lands. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 17:36, 2 February 2013 (UTC)
Ferdinand followed the religion Roman Catholic! That is important and MUST be put in his bio!!!
Why did Magellen "overwinter" from November through March in Brazil? Winter in Brazil is in June, and January is the height of summer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.127.116.11 (talk) 23:10, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Edit request on 7 September 2013
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
Edit request on 10 September 2013
|This edit request has been answered. Set the
Organised is spelled organized.
- Organise and organize are the exact same and neither is more correct than the other. Organize is common in North America and Organise is common outside of North America. Similar to "favorite vs favourite". However if an article is identified as being written in one over the other then we would correct it as such but this is not the case for this article. For an example of a certain style of english see Talk:Prince Harry of Wales. — 21:18, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
An editor, I think Mateo Flecha, made a change in one the first few paragraphs, putting the phrase (with ElCano) this way: "Magellan...who became known for having organised the first circumnavigation of the Earth, by Juan Sebastián Elcano". ("To avoid confusion"). We understand, but there was no confusion. The original sentence says "organized" (did not say "made it", but if said, would be well - in great part at least - and did not say "completed") He happened to "completed" it in multiple other trips, but it's another story. Only says "organized".
- Understand the point about "organize" and was careful not change the meaning there, but I found it strange (i) that circumnavigation (organization of it) is highlighted in the first (and most read) paragraphs as Magellan's main feat, (ii) that it is also said that his expedition completed the circumnavigation after his death, and that after this there is no mention to who was the one that commanded that expedition to complete that circumnavigation.
- Furthermore, how could have Magellan organized (a priori) a circumnavigation trip (the first) if this wasn't his royal commission when leaving Spain? As it is well said (way below) the original purpose of the trip was other more practical (and not this sort of sportive thing) and the circumnavigation was a result of decissions taken after his death, and during the voyage. So I think the article's wording tries again to be precise in saying that "he organized a trip that resulted (should we add "fortuitously"?) in the first circumnavigation".
- In other words, I also assume good faith in the Editor, but believe that the introduction of the article, besides being as accurate with Magellan's relationship with the first circumnavigation of the Earth, and granting him no more and no less credit that he deserves, should also name who was the one who really completed this circumnavigation , even if this is explained with more detail below. Otherwise the reader, if not reading very carefully ("organize", "resulted" and other key words) and only reading the first paragraphs may receive the false idea that Magellan was the first circumnavigator of the Earth. In fact I had also to correct the infobox where it said that Magellan was best known for having "captained the first circumnavigation of the world" (was it his ghost who captained the last third?)
- Regarding circumnavigations completed with different trips in time and expeditions/ships, it seems an interesting point which deserves better explanation in the article. I am not sure that is what's behind the concept of circumnavigation, and deffinitely as you say it isn't the ciorcumnavigation referred in the article wich clearly is the Magallanes-Elcano one.
- In all, Magellan is a great historic figure, with enough everlasting merits, as to make all efforts to avoid confusing the reader with others that aren't his.Mateo Flecha (talk) 19:23, 13 October 2013 (UTC)
- Mateo, we are in complete agreement. Obviously I agree with the mention (above or bellow, or both, in the article (the argument was another)) of Juan Sebastian Elcano, completing the circum-navigation and making the circumnavigation. I hope there is no misunderstanding between us. I will back here to this talk page, maybe, with more time. But I think this answer is enough to understanding between us. P.S: Magellan in Moluccas is a matter of controversy. There are at least one or two sources(?) that sustain it, if I remember (Fernão de Oliveira?), but it is controversial. Any way, this is a technically different kind of a world periplus, perhaps, also important.--LuzoGraal (talk) 19:43, 14 October 2013 (UTC)
- Luzo, thanks for your constructive/kind approach. I've understood that your arguments were also related, as were mine with Magellan, to the accuracy when referring Elcano's contribution to circumnavigation. I'll be glad to learn more about that possible world periplus, which is of course relevant.Mateo Flecha (talk) 06:45, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
This sentence (we assume in good faith by the Editor) is in disagreement with all the vast literature on the subject and is ambiguous (not to say "wrong"), giving an image of Magellan as a kind of owner of expeditions undertaken only by others or by another, in the case Juan Sebastian Elcano, giving a "false" or ambiguous image of a somebody without participation in it (I know this is not the intended meaning, I believe), totally in contradiction with the general historiography and the most world historians (ie, per se, it was more than enough for removal or restored without further arguments). But reinforcing: if it was to be more accurate and more in line with the generally historiography, the phrase would be "completed by Juan Sebastian Elcano", but that would be a mere repetition of the phrase or references already placed below in the article. And these are the first paragraphs of the biographical article of Ferdinand Magellan - article focuses obviously on the expedition around the world that gave him worldwide fame - but an article about Magellan, and their personal achievements etc.(if it was an article about "circumnavigation (only) or about the navigator Juan Sebastian de Elcano, and less ambiguous, maybe) - And we speak here in the first two paragraphs of an article (as a whole) not only about a trip or other feats, but on a historical personality.
Magellan was twice in Malaysia regions and the coast of Sumatra (western Indonesia), with Diogo Lopes de Sequeira and Afonso de Albuquerque etc. (If, beyond that, accompanied his friend Francisco Serrão, with António Abreu, to the Moluccas, before his return to Portugal, is still a matter of discussion because there is no survivor mention of his presence in the expedition).
The phrase has in itself the first circumnavigation, referring obviously to the circumnavigation of Magellan-Elcano (no doubt and no other), but as the "first" we have also the "circumnavigation" of Magellan travels or his personal tour around the world, which was the first in fact, being the circumnavigation expedition for Charles V and Spain (or Castile), referred there, in fact, further part of the voyages and life of Magellan (i.e., the personal periplus of Magellan around the world) and being on another plane obviously, in addition to the "first", the "second" on personal "circum-navigations" of the navigators and crew men that completed it, like the great navigator Juan Sebastian Elcano (and still are the third and fourth - for the survivors abandoned by Elcano in Cape Verde, brought by Portuguese later, and some survivors of the nao Trinidad, in the Moluccas, brought to Portugal by the Portuguese via Moluccas and via India, later).
And even confining it only to expedition that ended in Circum-navigation at the service of Spain, why is it so attributed to Magellan by historians and traditional popular culture, to Elcano and others also, but to Magellan? (Good question and controversial, since was Elcano who made it or completed what became a circumnavigation).
1. Because was Magellan who conceived the voyage (was not intended to circumnavigate, but want to get to the Indonesian region, wanted and aimed to reach a region where he had been before (before, by the east, this journey by west), which implied his own (and some companions) circumnavigation, which actually they did. Magellan was fully aware of it, through his plan - and took it out, reaching Asia.
2nd Maybe because Pigaffeta, one of the few survivors of the voyage (and completed it) gives the credit to Magellan (about "circum-navigation"), for the same reasons above.
3rd Magellan was captain general (and who indicated the direction) in about two-thirds of the expedition, and in the unexplored part of the world for Europeans. Elcano, on the other hand, as captain of the expedition (in the surviving ship, opting for the west, contrary to the men of the nau Trinidad), in about one third of the expedition, and only in waters already navigated by Europeans. But Elcano makes a great and brave direct navigation south of the equator in the Indian Ocean, to avoid the most used routes and bases of the Portuguese India armadas and ships, to remember btw, although prior Portuguese expeditions had already also traversed and explored the southern Indian Ocean. --LuzoGraal (talk) 15:51, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
How many crew?
Under "The Fleet", adding up the crew of each of the five ships totals 235. Under "The Crew", it says the crew is "about 270". Under "Survivors", it says "18 of 237".
- "Which is it?" The best answer is probably "Nobody knows."
- "Why the discrepancies?" The best answer is probably "Differing information gleaned from separate sources. (see e.g.,  - about 270,  - limited to 235 max,  - 277).
- Also see WP:DUE. This probably ought to be clarified in the article. Wtmitchell (talk) (earlier Boracay Bill) 05:24, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
I'd like to add my book to secondary sources on this page. *Murphy, Patrick J.; Coye, Ray W. (2013). Mutiny and Its Bounty: Leadership Lessons from the Age of Discovery. Yale University Press. ISBN 9780300170283. Can someone help please?Profpjm (talk) 19:52, 12 April 2014 (UTC)