From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Paranormal (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article falls under the scope of WikiProject Paranormal, which aims to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to the paranormal and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the attached article, help with current tasks, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and discussions.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
WikiProject Islands (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Islands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of islands 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.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.

Chaisson's book[edit]

Just added a mainstream media reference for Chaisson's book. Don't think it should be dismissed out of hand. May 14 15:45, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Just changed the Chaisson book reference. While his book should not be dismissed, this article should also emphasise the abundance of controversy over his writings, especially in Nova Scotia and among experts in Chinese studies Colonial Irony-- article by David S G Goodman Professor of Contemporary China Studies University of Technology, Sydney, AUS.

Local Nova Scotian-- 13:59, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Plutarch & Madeira[edit]

The georgeaphy of the pale described by Plutarch sounds like Madeira. If this theory is plausible, it should be noted in the article (talk) 07:18, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Aactually, the wikiepdia article of Madeira is one my side. Check it out: (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 07:19, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Ante Ilha[edit]

Does the interpretation of the name as Ante-Ilha ("Fore-island") belong here or at Antilles? -- Error 00:33, 21 Aug 2004 (UTC)

Passive voice and no references[edit]

I'm noting the pervasive use of the passive of nonattribution "was said to lie..." "was also identified with..." (by whom?) and the lack of any reference to any historical document in this entry ("A Portuguese legend tells..."), nor to any modern historian's discussion of the development of "Antillia". "The island is first known to have appeared on a map in 1424." Whose map? Where? Not avery good entry yet. --Wetman 06:08, 6 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I agree with you. I could not identify e.g. the Arab geographer which used the explanation of the name as "Jezirat al Tennyn". But I have changed the first mentioning of the name "Antilia". Its name was used at first 1424 in the Pizzigano Chart.

-- 17:52, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

~ "Bishops embarked with their flocks" "Flocks" as in real sheep or Flocks as in congregations? It matters.

General clarification/detail[edit]

I believe Ante-Ilha should apply to both Antillia and Antilles, as the latter almost certainly derives from the former. Have clarified several vague references, most notably from Babcock's excellent book on the subject, "Legendary Islands of the Atlantic". Also added footnotes where relevant.--Virtualken (talk) 13:01, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

1421 Theory[edit]

Didn't Gavin Menzies write in his book 1421 that Antilia was in fact Puerto Rico, and had a Portugese settlement on it 50 years before Columbus' discovery of America? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Holy triple m (talkcontribs) 15:43, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Seven Cities of Gold[edit]

Til Eulenspiegel- apologies that you felt my creation of a new page on the Seven Cities of Gold was peremptive. It was created as a rather swiftly written draft, as I felt the two legends were sufficiently distinct to warrant separate entries. Although I've got a long history of drafting definitive entries- most of the original work here is my own- this was the first time I'd created a new page and was unaware of any informal protocol about discussion. The Antillia page seemed to be getting unwieldy, as it has such a rich history already. My edits were maybe rash, but I still feel the two ought to be distinct entries.--Virtualken (talk) 13:38, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for discussing it. I am not sure the Spanish and Portuguese legends are sufficiently distinct, they would seem to be only slight variants. But I am willing to be flexible particularly if you could demonstrate why you feel they are sufficiently distinct to have separate entries. As for "informal protocol", for future reference, you can use the {{split}} template to signal an intention to break off a new article.
Note, when I found this page it actually stated (among other things) that Cabeza de Vaca had conquered vast swathes of territory in the southwest -- which ought to make anyone who has ever read Naufragios die laughing! Til Eulenspiegel (talk) 14:06, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for opening up the discussion Til, and for the editing tips. I agree, when I first came to the article it seemed inaccurate and not at all well referenced. My research and interest was originally cartographic but soon led to an exploration, pardon the pun, of written sources regarding Antillia. My personal highlight was coming to a first edition of d'Anghiera's transcription of Columbus's diaries, to find that the appropriate index leaves were still sealed and having to request the librarian to open them!

My motivation in believing they were distinct enough to warrant separate entries was firstly that the cartographical record of Antillia seems to have evolved prior to the Portuguese landclaims. Those sources that I've read seem to amount to a cultural claim by the Portuguese, whereas the later Spanish records refer only to the Septe Cidades (eg Cornelius de Jode, 1593) on the mainland. At the same time Antillia was represented as a separate, smaller island at various locations in the Atlantic- leading to the latter confusion re: the Azores, Antillies, Puerto Rico etc. It seems to me that at this point some kind of diplomatic treaty had been agreed between the two nations- hopefully someone might enlighten me here- resulting in the eventual formalising of their respective settlements on the continent.

So my understanding really was that whilst the Antillia and Sete Ciudades legends coincided, they represented a historic European cultural and religious settlement as territorial claim, rather than the later (Spanish) tradition of the Seven Cities as native, 'wealthy' settlements ripe for plunder by the conquistadors to justify the costs of sponsoring their voyages. Hope that you might agree. --Virtualken (talk) 14:04, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Til- Not sure if you've been indisposed- or whether you've read the case above. Unless I hear otherwise I can only assume that you're happy with the reasons above, and hope to distill the SCoG info onto its own page next week (wc 7/12/09).--Virtualken (talk) 12:41, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Mérida 1150?[edit]

In 1150 Mérida was under Muslim rule since 713, although this one-time important Roman town has gone perhaps into decline after the foundation of Badajoz by the Muslim conquerors. Perhaps in 1150 there were some troubles with what in Spanish we call "almohades" (from the Arabic "al-Muwahhidun")(see Almohad dynasty)), puritan Muslims from Northern Africa. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 18:48, 18 February 2010 (UTC)

By the way, Mérida was the ancient capital of Lusitania. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 17:49, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Mumbai Antillia[edit]

Probably needs a disambigulation page I would say, but at the moment there aren't many categories- Antillia (legendary island), Antilia (home), Antilles (Caribbean islands)... Captain Antilles (Star Wars character)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Virtualken (talkcontribs) 19:45, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

Article Revamped[edit]

I found the opening paragraph too big, with too much detailed information. In an the process of shifting much of that text from the heading to the main body, I kind of got carried away and revised a substantial part of the article. I don't think my changes modify the content substantively. The changes are:

  1. The heading paragraph is slimmed down to its essentials.
  2. I swapped the order, so that the legend comes before the cartography.
  3. I begin with a quick summary about Atlantic island legends in general. A few may feel it has insufficient inline references, but such references are found in abundance in the specific wiki articles on the Fortunate isles, Canaries, St. Brendan, etc. I am just summarizing those articles.
  4. the etymology is compacted into one section, bringing the ante-ilha theory first.

I have also added numerous new references, including linking passages to texts in googlebooks. (check the footnotes).

I will be revamping the latter part of the article soon to eliminate duplication of earlier information (should have done that already, but had to save my changes before I lost them). I am also compiling an exhaustive list of 15th maps which depict Antillia. These will be coming shortly. Just want to give you all a heads up before I proceed. Walrasiad (talk) 00:05, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

"Legend" section[edit]

Um, why does the legend section spend several paragraphs discussing the general phenomenon of mythical islands? IIUC, Antillia is a specific myth, and has no connection with, for example, Atlantis. (talk) 01:39, 10 February 2014 (UTC)