Talk:Mexican War of Independence

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Mexico (Rated C-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mexico, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Mexico 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.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

This article has comments here.

WikiProject Military history (Rated C-Class)
MILHIST This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
C This article has been rated as C-Class on the quality assessment scale.
This article has an assessment summary page.

Valladolid[edit]

Is this a reference to Valladolid, Yucatán or to Morelia, Michoacán, then known as Valladolid? Yucatán seems a bit off the beaten track for the insurgents, in light of their other theatres of activity. Hajor 18:52, 7 Jul 2004 (UTC)

I just noticed this. I believe you are right that the link should be to Morelia. Yucatán was at the time only accessible by sea from the rest of Mexico, not somewhere that could be "marched" to. -- Infrogmation 17:04, 26 Oct 2004 (UTC)

It is Morelia, at the time Valladolid from the province of Michoacán. The city was renamed in 1828 after Jose María MORELOS y Pavon, second in command of the Insurgent Army. perdon —Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.143.214.80 (talk) 22:33, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Date of the signing of the Treaty of Córdoba ?[edit]

According to the Treaty of Córdoba page, it was signed on August 24, 1821, not "1821 September 27" mentioned on the Mexican War of Independence page. August'21 was also mentioned on the Córdoba, Veracruz page. Can someone in the know confirm the date, please ? Thanks. -- PFHLai 20:17, 2005 August 22 (UTC)

Encyclopædia Britannica says its Aug. 24, 1821 [1], so I'm going to revise the article accordingly. -- PFHLai 04:25, 2005 August 23 (UTC)

September 27 1821, is the date when the "trigarante" army enters Mexico City and is considered as the date of the Mexican War of Independenc

What day did Hidalgo die on ?[edit]

this page lists july 31, but the hidalgo entry lists july 30 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miguel_Hidalgo

He died on July 30, days later after the other insurgents because of his excomulgation process

POV?[edit]

To me this looks POV towards the rebels. For instance: in the table the rebels are called 'Mexico' instead of rebels/revolutionaries/terrorists. Also, it states that the royalists killed like long kinds civilians, no number given of civilians killed by the rebels. From the text I understand the rebels killed civilians. It would be remarkable if the guerilla war did not have royalists civilians (collaborators) as victims. <---Gachos Pukkie 12:51, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Pukkie,
True, there could be more details and quantitative estimates on the atrocities committed by the rebels. For instance, the 1810 siege of Guanajuato and ensuing massacre of loyalist Mexicans is one of many dark pages in Mexico's history. There were doubtless many other massacres by both sides, which may not have been recorded because of the localized and even personal nature of many episodes.
On the other hand, for the sake of legalism, the table is correct in labeling the rebels "Mexico," because the uprising was initiated after Hidalgo's proclamation of Mexican independence on Sept. 15, 1810. Because in later years this date came to be considered Mexico's de jure (though not de facto) independence day, the actions of the rebels can be considered those of Mexico. Indeed, in modern historical analysis, the history of independent Mexico heavily depends upon Hidalgo's grito as a marker--one speaks of the era before the grito and of the era after it. --Unregistered user


Actual dates[edit]

September 16 and 17. The date was changed on the late 19th century by Porfirio Díaz, to fit his own birthday a day before.--Fluence (talk) 03:47, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Spanish Reports!!!(stupid)[edit]

I know Spansh reports are stupid but this is a good page to do one on the independence of Mexico!

I give props to wikipedia!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.20.242.64 (talk) 01:17, 16 September 2008 (UTC)


There is a HUGE TYPO on the dates... but I don't know the correct ones... The text "In January 2009" appears in the text while talking about Mexican independence. This is clearly off by almost 200 years. -Pablo Arriola —Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.201.108.3 (talk) 19:44, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Mexican-US Border?[edit]

The town where Hidalgo and other insurgents were captured was Acatita de Baján, in the now state of Chihuahua. But at the time, California, Texas, and New Mexico were Mexican (or New Spanian) Territories -acounting for half of the country's area- so they where quite far from the US Border.201.141.27.25 (talk) 00:00, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Rewrite?[edit]

I think this article needs some work. For example, the section on independence is extremely short, twice rebel armies magically appear without any statement of where they came from, their size, etc. This article is very low start class in my opinion. I would help with grammer and phrasing if necessary, but I am hoping someone out there has mor expertise on this subject than I have and has sources for many of the factual additions that are necessary.205.152.247.15 (talk) 12:49, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

sorry, forgot to log in for the previous additionTheseeker4 (talk) 12:49, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Hello Theseeker. I've been considering working on this article, as you're write, it does need some work. I've been trying to work off the Spanish and Italian versions some, as they're both pretty well done. You are welcome to help. Thanks, GrszX 13:11, 3 October 2008 (UTC) and dont forget the most important person of the war in 1809 Tynisha Simmons was the first black female to gain respect from spain and mexico.

I agree about the need for the rewrite. Their is a tremendous amount of analysis in the section about Miguel Hidalgo, and it seems out of place. For example: "The truth about Hidalgo is a little more complex. The facts and dates leave no doubt: his was the first serious insurrection on Mexican soil against Spanish authority, and he managed to get quite far with his poorly armed mob. He was a charismatic leader and made a good team with the military man Allende despite their mutual hatred. But Hidalgo's shortcomings make one ask "What if?"" This is not neutral, and it even sounds like it could have been plagiarized. -HorselessHeadsmen — Preceding unsigned comment added by HorselessHeadsmen (talkcontribs) 04:02, 21 March 2014 (UTC)

Text overlaps picture[edit]

The text overlaps the picture of the declaration of independence when viewed with Firefox, and the size is enlarged a few times. (Ctl+=) Unfree (talk) 20:03, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


Merge: Mexican War of Independence and Grito de Dolores[edit]

I'm proposing that the above two articles be merged together because they have very similar topics (first explains what happens before and the outcome, last explains the remembrance and the famous saying). I'm also suggesting that the topic would be moved to Mexican independence.Comments? Respective topics will be headlined with the merge box if needed. Totlmstr (talk) 22:32, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I respectfully oppose the merger. The two topics are related of course, but I propose that they are distinct enough to merit two articles (especially on an on-line encyclopedia like Wikipedia). Besides, the Grito is an event of reference not only to the war of independence but to Mexican politics and national identity, that it would be confusing to subsume it in a general article. It should also be noted that the Grito and Hidalgo's efforts start the successful campaign for independence, but it was not the only factor nor the starting point. Hidalgo's efforts are a continuation of events that began unrolling even before the coup carried out by Gabriel Yermo, and the war ended by a coalition of royalists and rebels, conservatives and liberals, many of which had no direct connection to the Grito. For at least these reasons I think the two should not be merged and the Grito article left as a stand-alone article. Thanks!TriniMuñoz (talk) 16:51, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Under Begining of War section.[edit]

Under the Beginning of War section the following reads "Hidalgo had already achieved notoriety- he gambled, fornicated, had children out of wedlock and didn't believe in Hell." Really?? I think this needs to be stricken as there are no citations or references to its veracity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brucejr (talkcontribs) 13:36, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Background section, reference to Martín Cortés[edit]

Some verification is needed to determine whether Martin Cortes was trying to eliminate the privileges of the conquistadors and whether his actions were a precursor to the 1810 War of Independence. My understanding from what I am reading on Wiki is that Martin Cortes (like others, including Pizarro) was unhappy about the New Laws, which were designed to replace the encomienda system. His motives were then not to eliminate the privileges of the conquistadors but to ensure that his inheritance would be protected. After reading the way the passage is currently written, one gets the impression that Martin Cortes was an advocate of indigenous workers' rights. This stikes me as inaccurate and inconsistent, however, I am not a scholar on this topic and so leave this to discussion. --Dorismirella (talk) 13:45, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Vandals[edit]

I have had this article temporarily protected today as there has been a rash of vandalism this week. It will expire on Sept 26th. PKT(alk) 21:07, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Insanely Undervalued Spanish/Royalist Casualties[edit]

At the battle of Monte de las Crucas alone, the Spanish defenders were basically overrun and consensus says that the vast majority of the nearly 3,000~ men were massacred. Likewise, we see 400 dead at Huajuapan de Leon alone on top of that. So with these facts in mind, how in God's name do we see- in a war of this scale, this length, and thus brutality- only 2,000 Spanish killed? Yes, I agree that the Spanish and Royalists had a qualitative advantage for most of the war, that large chunks of the battles were relatively small (in comparison to-say- the regular battles of the American Revolution, French Revolution, Napoleonic Wars, Latin American revolutions, etc), and that the Royalists as a result tended to suffer relatively smaller losses. But there is no reason to believe that they were *that* small and plenty of reasons to believe they weren't. 75.36.164.241 (talk) 19:18, 23 March 2014 (UTC)