Talk:History of the Philippines (1521–1898)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

What is this[edit]

is it all cut and paste —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:39, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Excuse me?[edit]

What is this page? It seems to be a cut-and-paste job from something else. (talk) 13:15, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

The "first mass" in the Philippines was at Mazaua[edit]

Not Limasawa. Not Butuan. Not Cebu, as also claimed.

The isle where an Easter mass was celebrated was Mazaua. This is the isle's name that comes from from the various eyewitness accounts of Antonio Pigafetta, Francisco Albo, Ginés de Mafra, The Genoese Pilot, Martín de Ayamonte.

Limasawa is the name invented by Fr. Francisco Combés pointing to an isle that is named Gatighan in Antonio Pigafetta's map and text. Combés wrote a three-paragraph epitome of the Mazaua incident based on three sources, Giovanni Battista Ramusio, Antonio de Herrera y Tordesillas, and Fr. Francisco Colín. Herrera wrote the isle where Magellan anchored was Mazagua (phonetically identical or equal to "masawa", a word found only in Butuanon and Tausog (a derivative of Butuanon) and in no other among the over 100 languages of the Philippines. Combés rejected Herrera claiming the port was Butuan. He also rejected the idea of a mass; his source did not narrate a mass on March 31, 1521. He also rejected the name given by Colín for the southern Leyte isle, "Dimasaua" which meant "this isle is not Herrera's 'Mazagua' because the Sunday Easter mass was celebrated as I relate in my story at Butuan." Since Combés's story mentions no mass, he did not have to negate or deny something that did not occur.

Limasawa therefore has no connection, no link, no reference to a mass!

Here is the story of Combes on Limasawa from the translation by Fr. Miguel Bernad, S.J.:

"The first time that the royal standards of the Faith were seen to fly in this island [of Mindanao] was when the Archipelago was first discovered by the Admiral Alonso de Magallanes. He followed a new and difficult route [across the Pacific], entering by the Strait of Siargao, formed by that island and that of Leyte, and landing at the island of Limasaua which is at the entrance of that Strait. Amazed by the novelty and strangeness of the [Spanish] nation and the ships, the barbarians of that island welcomed them and gave them good refreshments.

"While at Limasaua, enjoying rest and good treatment, they heard of the River of Butuan, whose chieftain was more powerful. His reputation attracted our men thither to see for themselves or be disillusioned, their curiosity sharpened by the fact that the place was nearby. The barbarian [chief] lived up to our men's expectations, providing them with the food they needed...Magellan contented himself with having them do reverence to the cross which is erected upon a hillock as a sign to future generations of their alliance...The solemnity with which the cross was erected and the deep piety shown by the Spaniards, and by the natives following the example of the Spaniards, engendered great respect for the cross.

"Not finding in Butuan the facilities required by the ships, they returned to Limasaua to seek further advice in planning their future route. The Prince of Limasaua told them of the three most powerful nations among the Pintados [Visayans], namely those of Caraga, Samar, and Zebu. The nearness of Zebu, the facilities of its port, and the more developed social structure (being more monarchical) aroused everyone's desire to go thither. Thus, guided by the chief of Limasaua, passing between Bool and Leyte and close to the Camotes Islands, they entered the harbor of Cebu by the Mandawe entrance on the 7th of April 1521, having departed from Limasaua on the first day of that month."

Translation by Fr. Miguel Bernad, S.J., "Butuan or Limasawa?" in: Kinaadman, Vol. III, 1981, pages 4-5. --Vicente Calibo de Jesus (talk) 01:21, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Is Moro derogatory for Filipinos?[edit]

Moro maybe derogartory for Spaniards but I don't think it is used in a derogative way by Filipinos.--Jondel (talk) 00:20, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

social transformation[edit]

d URL /index.html was not found on this server.

Apache/1.3.39 Server at Port 80 —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:17, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Magellan and Mactan[edit]

The article says, in part

Magellan invaded Mactan Island with only 48 armored men (less than half his crew) against Lapu-Lapu's army of some 1,500 warriors. Several hours later, Magellan lay dead without having reached the shores of Mactan. See Battle of Mactan

I haven't checked further, but it seems counterintuative to me that Magellan could have taken part in the the Battle of Mactan (described in that article as close hand-to-hand combat) without having reached the shores of Mactan. -- Boracay Bill (talk) 23:45, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

The main article quotes an eyewitness:-
Recognizing the captain, so many turned upon him that they knocked his helmet off his head twice... An Indian hurled a bamboo spear into the captain's face, but the latter immediately killed him with his lance, which he left in the Indian's body. Then, trying to lay hand on sword, he could draw it out but halfway, because he had been wounded in the arm with a bamboo spear. When the natives saw that, they all hurled themselves upon him. One of them wounded him on the left leg with a large cutlass, which resembles a scimitar, only being larger. That caused the captain to fall face downward, when immediately they rushed upon him with iron and bamboo spears and with their cutlasses, until they killed our mirror, our light, our comfort, and our true guide. When they wounded him, he turned back many times to see whether we were all in the boats. Thereupon, beholding him dead, we, wounded, retreated, as best we could, to the boats, which were already pulling off... "[1]

I'll change this article to match the quote. Gubernatoria (talk) 02:07, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

Title needs to be changed[edit]

I think that the current title of this article, Spanish conquest in the Philippines (1521–1898) is not good. The Spanish conquests of the Philippines are only a small part of the story of the 377 year period this article covers but the title suggests otherwise. It should really be titled something like "The Philippines under Spanish Rule", which is about a period of time in which Spanish rule dominated but also implies that much else was happening. I'll wait a month for a response. If none comes I'll change it. Provocateur (talk) 23:36, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

And I say the article should be renamed back to History of the Philippines (1521–1898), in line with other similar articles (such as History of the Philippines (1898–1946). ༆ (talk) 05:41, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
This section should really have been placed at the bottom of the talk page, but other than that, I concur. This article really should be at History of the Philippines (1521–1898). - Alternativity (talk) 12:25, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
History of the Philippines (1521–1898) makes sense. I concur. Provocateur (talk) 05:03, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Provocateur, do the honors already :D - Alternativity (talk) 05:27, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
Done! Months are going by rather quickly these days. Title is now consistent with related articles and reflects the breadth of the subject. Adios Provocateur (talk) 10:06, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Effects of Spanish rule on women and caste system[edit]

20:02, 4 March 2014 (UTC)

Philippine referendum of 1599[edit]

The Filipinos consented to be governed by Spain in 1599. Your reference should from a book written by those who were alive during the time the event was taking place.IsaLang (talk) 08:07, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on History of the Philippines (1521–1898). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 16:12, 3 April 2017 (UTC)

  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference dom was invoked but never defined (see the help page).