File talk:Spanish Empire Anachronous 0.PNG

 

Alaska

I think that parts of Alaska, as well as Vancouver Island should be included in the Spanish Empire map. Remember the foundation of Cordova and Valdez in Prince William Sound in Alaska, and various Spanish bases in Vancouver Island.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.122.59.233 (talk • contribs) 2 April, 2010 (UTC)

Only explorations. Trasamundo (talk) 01:27, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Sources

I write herewith the fundaments and the sources that they have made possible the depiction of the map. Trasamundo (talk) 01:56, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

FUNDAMENTS I have ignored the discoveries, because it is not a matter of this map, as well as of the temporary conquests of a ongoing war. Since the historical maps published in contemporary epoch raise diversity of borders being contradicted some by others (as example of this lack of accuracy see this map the independence of Spanish America [1], I have avoided as far as possible to focus on the boundaries of these maps, and I try to support the boundaries on textual references, which after all, the textual references explain the historical processes that the map you want to illustrate. The employment of different colors gives an extra information that highlights the different historical periods, while only one color is confusing because it mixes very different eras and areas, as the Spanish Sahara with the Franche-Comté. Different colors make that the map, for itself, show and illustrate changes in the territories, even without the legend. Claiming that a map with colours is confusing is equal to say that only a color-blind can understand maps. If someone wants to see the real extension of the Spanish empire then it is so simple as seeing all the colored areas. As the Spanish territories or linked to Spain were getting lost in progressive stages, I raise several distinctive colors: one colour for the lost territories to the Treaties of Utrecht-Baden, other one for the lost territories to the en:Hispanic American wars of independence, other one for the lost territories due to en:Spanish-American War, other one for the lost territories due to en:Decolonization of Africa, another color and special mention for Portugal during en:Iberian Union, and finally as remnant, the current territories of Spain: the metropolis. No claims: I have based on criteria of efficiency and objectivity of the facts, but not of legal technicalities derived of claims, because hereby depicting the claims are not objetive: subject to subjective and particular interpretations on the basis of certain and interested juridical titles, and even the claims ignore the reality of the historical facts, for example, this map of China in 1948 shows Mongolia inside the borders of en:Republic of China when en:Mongolian People's Republic already was independent country, although Republic of China wanted to consider Mongolia inside its borders, China (ROC) was not exercising any authority on that territory. The territorial disputes suppose other examples of confusion based in claims: juridical titles, alleged rights, recognitions of sovereignty,... but finally the objectivity is obtained distinguishing who has effective power in the zone. A territory claimed is not a possessed territory but alleged rights, and therefore, they were not inside the administrative Spanish system. The name of claim indicates a pretension or demand of something that it does not possess and escapes to the control. Over such not possessed territories there is an aspiration, or a demand, a pretension, alleged and/or disputed rights supported in certain juridical titles, or also, in acts of claim by explorers along a journey, without any continuity nor international recognition. But, if we follow the logic of the juridical technicality of the juridical titles, incorporating claims as part of the Spanish boundaries, (because juridically it might be thought that legally they were corresponding to its borders) following the same logic we will have to remove Flemish-burgundian territories, Milan, Charolais, The Rif-Tarfaya, because these territories belonged juridically to other countries, and they were inside their borders. In case of disputed territories, I have paid attention to the agreement of the parts reflected in a legal and fulfill agreement, which fixes the borders to one and another side, which allows to establish objectivity and stability. So, the treaties of delimiting borders is an objective way to establish sovereignty according to the international law: [2] [3]: Although continous in principle, sovereignty cannot be exercised in fact at every moment on every point of a territory. The intermittence and discontinuity compatible with the maintenance of the right necessarily differ according as inhabited or uninhabited regions are involved, or regions enclosed within territories in which sovereignty is unconstestably displayed, or again regions accesible from, for instance, the high seas. It is true that neighbouring States may by convention fix limits to their own sovereignty, even in regions such as the interior of scarcely explored continents where such sovereignty is hardly manifested, and in this way each may prevent the other from any penetration of its territory. The delimitation of hinterland may also be mentioned in this connection. If, however, no conventional line of sufficient topographical precision exists, or if there are gaps in the frontiers otherwise established, or if a conventional line leaves room for doubt, of if, as, for example, in the case of an island situated in the high seas, the question arises whether a title is valid erga omnes, the actual continuous and peaceful display of State functions is in case of dispute the sound and natural criterium of territorial sovereignty Properly, the map is not based either on suppositions of juridical technicalities or depicting territories belong to, but it focusses on the factuality, depicting the territories ruled/come under/administered inside the administrative Spanish system, or merely subject to the control of the Spanish administration, specially when those territories are recognized internationally in treaties of delimiting of borders, that sanctioned the stable presence of the Spanish administration circumscribed to a definite borders.

DEPICTION

• [4]: The colonial level comprised the principal overseas officials, who deputized for the King. The Spanish colonies were gradually divided into Viceroyalties: for New Spain (1535), Peru (1569), New Granada (1717-1724 and 1740) and La Plata (1776). The Portuguese Empire had a less uniform system, the titles conferred often varyng between Viceroy and Governor or Captain General. Brazil was made a Captaincy General in 1549 and changed to a Viceroyalty in 1640; Angola was given a Governor General in 1592, and Moçambique a Captain General in 1792; while the most important post of responsability overseas in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was the Vicerolyalty of Goa (1505), which supervised Portuguese settlements thoughout the Indian Ocena and East Indies.

SPANISH AMERICA §Alaska and Oregon: [5] Not shaded. Alaska simply was explored with sporadic acts of claim without settlement, and Oregon was a claimed disputed territory between Spain and UK, solved in the Nootka Conventions. North of California, only I have indicated the Spanish effective possession of Nootka. §Northern boundaries: I have put as north limit the en:Adams-Onís Treaty (article III) [6] [7][8], effective on February 22, 1821 [9] as border stable and recognized internationally, though mixed with Louisiana. Sources of the extension of Louisiana: [10] : Louisiana Purchase: The territory purchased Apr. 30, 1803 for $15,000,000 by the U.S. from France; extended from the Mississippi to the Rocky Mts and from Gulf of Mexico to British America (Canada) incl. the basin of the Mossouri River and the major part of the Great Plains drained by W tributaries of the Mississippi: 885,000 sq mi (2,2292,150 sq Km.); out of it were later formed four states (Arkansas, Iowa, Missouri, and Nebraska) and parts of nine others (Louisiana, Minnesota, Oklahoma, Kansas, Colorado, Wyoming, Montana, Noth Dakota, and South Dakota); with ill-defined boundaries, most of the territory had been acquired by Spain from France 1762 in compensation for spanish losses as French ally in the Seven Years' War and retroceded to France by treaty of San Ildefonso Oct.1, 1800. [11]: On October 1, 1800, the day after the singing of the Franco-American treaty, another treaty was signed, at San Ildefonso, between France and spain. Under its terms, Louisiana, which France had ceded to Spain in 1763, was to be retroceded to France as soon as a general peace was concluded. The retrocesion of Louisiana became effective with the signing of the Peace of Amiens of 1802. The definition of the term Louisiana was somewhat vague. Roughly speaking the territory included, besides the present state of Luisiana, all of Missouri, Kansas, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Nebraska, Noth and South Dakota, Iowa, and Minnesota, and parts of Montana, Wyoming, and Colorado. [12]: The French territory of Louisiana included portions or the entire area of present-day Arkansas, Missouri, Iowa, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, New Mexico, Oklhoma, Kansas, Montana, Wyoming, Colorado, and Louisiana. The Louisiana Territory also included portions of southern Manitoba, southern Manitoba, southern Saskatchewan, and southern Alberta in Canada. As for Adams-Onis treaty: [13] In 1819, he signed the Florida treaty with Don Luis de Onis, which gave us not only the Floridas, and an indemnity of five millions of dollars for our merchants, but the first acknowledged boundary from the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific. [14] The Adams-Onís treaty, which became effective on February 22, 1821, also included provisions to survey the actual boundary and establish official markers. [15] By the terms there set out, Spain not only acquiesced in the earlier American occupations of chunks of West Florida but ceded all the rest of both Floridas to the United States. The Louisiana Purchase was ackowledged and its wstern boundary fixed along the Sabine, Red, and Arkansas Rivers, and then north to the 42nd paralel of latitude. §Floridas 17th century: →→Juan Pardo's route to Zacatecas: [16]:El nuevo marqués [Pedro Menéndez de Avilés] se estableció en lo que hoy es Carolina del Sur, fundando la ciudad de Santa Elena en la actual isla de Parris. Desde allí, el capitán Juan Pardo estableció una línea de puestos avanzados en dirección al oeste como el primer paso en el propósito de abrir un camino transcontinental hacia las minas de la Nueva España. [17] Travelling in a northerly direction, Pardo cameto de "Xuala" (Cheraw) province named by DeSoto. Pardo built a fort, which he called Fort San Juan though to sit beside the Native American town of Joara, and after leaving a small garrison of thirty soldiers, continued his explorations. One year later this fort was destroyed by the Cheraw. [18] In April 1566 Menéndez and a force of 150 soldiers sailed north with the obbective od securin a firm hold on the coast as far as Prot Royal. After dealing succesfully with the coastal Indians, the Spaniards began building an earthwork and palisade fort to guard the settlement of Santa Elena. [...] Santa Elena also became a base of operations for exploring the interior. In 1566 and 1567 Capt Juan Pardo led two expeditions. [...] The first trek lasted four months and took Pardo and his men into the mountains of what is now North Carolina. The Spaniards built Fort San Juan in the foothill of the Appalachians and left a small garrison to protect Spain's intrests. On Pardo's second march inland he built and garrisoned four small forts, but not much is known of the fate of those Spanish soldiers in the wilderness. It is thought that most of them were killed by Indians in retribution for the destruction of several Indian villages. Pardo and his party, however, returned safely to Santa Elena. [19] Pardo edificó varios misiones-fuertes en el interior. Esperábase que los colonizadores de Santa Elena pronto establecerían granjas en la zona. [20] In 1565, Menendez set about establishing strong settlement and fortifications at Santa Elena as his king had long desired.[...] [21] On December 1,1556, the Pardo expedition left Santa Elena probably proceeding up the Coosawhatchie River [...] At the foot of the Appalachian Mountains, he built Fort San Juan near the Indian village of Joada. There left Sergeant Boyano and a small garrison. [...] After these highly exaggerated exploits, Boyano moved west to the Indian country of Chiala in western Georgia. There he built another fort for his party to await the arrival of Captain Pardo [...] [22] Pardo began his second expedition into the interior on September 1, 1567. He proceeded up the Savannah River to Cofitachequi and them struck out overland to relieve the garrison at Fort San Juan. Whn he found it he then marched through the rolling hills of the South Carolina and Georgia piedmont until he found Sergeant Boyano at Chiaha. [...] He [Pardo] placed garrisons in blockhouses t Chiaha, Joada, Cauchi, and Guatari. Pardo then took the remainder of his force and returned to Santa Elena. These wilderness outposts did not last long and their fate is not well known. [23] In 1566, Jua Pardo led an expedition out from San Felipe to explore the interior. In the country of the Sara Indians, in what is now North Carolina, Pardo built a fort. [...] Pardo left a sergeant and thirty soldiers at the fort and returned to San Felipe. [...] Receiving orders back from Pardo, the sergeant led his men into the country of the Creeks, where he built another small fort and waited for Pardo, who arrived there in 1567. From there the Pardo expedition visited a number of Creek towns and possibly some Cherokee towns, apparently with no untoward incidents. [24] A further probe into the mountains in 1566 was initiated from Fort San Felipe on Port Royal Sound as Capt. Juan Pardo led 125 soldiers northward on an exploratory mission. Attempting to establish a base in the foothills, Pardo erected Fort San Juan near Salisbury, North Carolina, and Fort San Pablo on the French Broad River [25]:Pardo's task was to complete the road as they called it from Santa Elena to Coosa territory. They did not mean road in the modern sense; the meant establish and perhaps mark the route through the forest as well as secure the route with a series of forts along its length.[...] At Guiomae, about eighty miles from Santa Elena, he built the first log outpost along his road to Coosa. [...] De Soto had found the people of Joara hospitable and the area pleasant, as did Pardo, who remained there for fifteen days. He rected a fort there naming it San Juan de Joara and later Cuenca. [...] Pardo erected a fort at Guatari, Fort Santiago [...] He and his men returned to Chiaha where he built a fort he named Fort San Pedro.Then he went west a few-days' journey into the mountains and built Fort San Pablo at Cauchi. [...] At each of the forts Pardo had contructed he left garrisons of men to maintain the forts for an indefinite period. He had the men take an oath that they would serve their king at the fort until they were relieved by fresh soldiers or given orders from the governor to leave. →→Forts on the Chattahoochee river: Coweta blockhouse and Fort Apalachicola [26] The Spanish saw the falls along the Chattahoochee as early as 1639 and tried to establish exclusive trade with the Creeks. In 1689 they built a fort at Apalachicola, named for a Creek town, to keep an eye on English traders. [27] Fort Apalachiola was constructed by the Spanish using Apalache Indian slaves from Florida in 1689 on the western bank of the Chattahoochee River. The fort, located near a friendly Hitchiti Indian village in present-day Russell County, was intended to serve as a barrier to encroachment into Spanish territory by English traders from the east. The dificulty of sustaining such remote outpost, combind with the fact that area Native Americans continued to carry on trade with the English, convinced the Spanish to abandon the fort in 1691. [28] Spanish colonial authorities determined that the Chattahoochee must be fortified and that the English advance must be checked, for to lose control of the Chattahoochee would leave the Apalachee missions exposed to attack. [...] When Quiroga's aid in their resettlement did not prevent the Apalachicolas from trading with the English, the governor announced plans to build a presidio on the Chattahoochee and to station infantrymen in the province to keep the traders out. Officials pointed out the difficulty in maintaining a garrison so far from established posts, but he decided nonetheless to build in 1689 at the town of Apalachicola. [29] By the end of 1690 the Spanish had abandoned their Chattahoochee fort, realizing that their plan to cow Natives into submission had backfired and that they should spend their recourses and energies protecting their missions in Florida. [30] the fortress was aimed at suppresing the Indians' trade with the English from Carolina, following the failure of five attempts by Quiroga and his predecessors to find the English and arrest them. [31]: Finally, in 1689, the Spaniards built a blockhouse near Coweta, where a garrison was maintained intil 1691, when exigencies in St. Augustine required withdrawal of small force →→Axacan (Chesapeake Bay):[32][33][34][35][36][37] →→Spanish Missions in Georgia: ¶ General considerations: [38] One of the most notable characteristics of the Spanish mission system in Florida was its inability to shape ndian societies at a distance. Since the Spaniards' strateguy was to transform Indians by changing them from within -by winning their hearts and minds- and to incorporate them into colonial system, the Europeans had little direct impact on Indians who lived at any distance from the missions. [39] In 1614, these included not only coastal Guale and Mocama but also the interior Timucuan provinces such as Antonico/Enacape and Avino on the St.Johns,Potano and the Suwannee River chiefdoms of the Timucua region, and to a lesser extent other chiefdoms sauch as Acuera, Ibihica and Oconi, in which no formal missions had yet been established. [40] [41] the Franciscan jurisdiction and the Spanish military jurisdiction directly overlapped, both in St.Augustine and within the mission frontier. ¶ Guale-Mocama. [42] The Guale and Mocama chiefdoms had already gone though several changes with the inauguration of the Spanish mission system among them. At the time that St.Augustine was established in 1565, there were two polities on the Georgia coast that roughly corresponded to the Guale chiefdom, which was centered along the inland waterways of Sapelo River, and the Mocama chiefdom, which extended from St.Simon Island to the St.John's River. [43] The guale and Mocama formed a single administrative district within the broader Florida colony. [44] Pocos años después estaba muy avanzado el restablecimiento de la cadena de misiones desde la isla de Santa Catalina en la actual Georgia hasta San Agustín. [45] During the early European colonial era, the Guale lived along the Atlantic coastal estuaries berween the mouths of the Ogeechee and Altahama rivers on the northern Georgia coast. [46] the territory of the Guale chiefdom extended along most of Georgia's northern coastline, including the barrier islands, estuaries, and mainland margin between the lower Ogeechee and Altamaha rivers. The southern boundary of the Guale territory lay at or just south of the mouth of the Altamaha River, between the southernmoost Guale chiefdom of Asajo-Talaje on the north bank near present-day Darien and the northernmost Mocama chiefdom of Guadalquini on the southern tip of Saint Simons Island. [47] The western boundary of Guale territory is somewhat more difficult to delinete, though most towns were clearly located within about 15 miles of the Atlantic coast. [...] The envoronment of the Guale is charactized as an Atlantic coastal estuary with adjacent mainland and barrier-island habitats. [48] the formation of the tribe ocurred somewhere inland from the mouth of the Savannah River, after which they moved into the Spanish mission provinces, ultimately inhabiting locations on the barrier island of th southeatern Georgia and northeastern Florida coast, in the red hills district of northwestern Florida, and along the upper Saint Johns River in central Florida. ¶ Yamasee: [49] During 1660s, inmigrant Yamasee Inians began to resettle inside the coastal mission provinces, though almot exclusively south of original Guale territory. [50] Later Yamasee communities established in other locations thoughout Spanish Florida ... [51] as 1662, the Yamasee began to flee southward into Spanish mission territory, and they were granted permission to settle on unoccupied lands on the barrier islands of Georgia and Florida, marking the beginning of the First Florida phase. [...] During these years in the mission provinces, the inmigrant Yamasees paid tribute to the Mocama chiefs on whose lands they were living and contributed regularly and substantially to the yearly Spanish labor draft. [52] Over the course of the next two decades, the Yamasee maintained a fiercely distinct identity within the Mocama and Guale mission territories, living in separate towns and refusing to convert to Roman Catholicism. ¶ Timucuan northern missions: [53] The northern chiefdoms of Ibihica and Oconi -strongly suspected to have local, simple chiefdoms- might be anticipated to posses perhaps between 1500 and 3000 ibdividuals based on the average projections above. *[54] In 1646 Governor Ruiz developed a plan to resettle the inhabitans of the northern interior mission of Oconi ... [55] The remnants of the local Oconi and Ibihic chiefdoms along the northern frontier were considered at that time part of the coastal Mocama province and would shortly fall victim to forced resettlement. [56] The even more distant interior Timucuan chiefdom of Oconi was formally missionized at some point prior to 1635, when the mission known as Santiago de Oconi was first mentioned. [57] The remnants of the local Oconi and Ibihica chiefdoms along the notthern frontier were considered at that time [1654] part of the coastal Mocama province 18th century: →→West Florida boundary: I have not put the claim of territory of Missouri leaving the border of en:Pinckney's Treaty. [58] In the treaty with Spain the boundary had not been specifically named, but since the British had so adamantly declared the mouth of the Yazoo (at 32º26' north) the boundary of West Florida in 1764, the Spanish felt justified in claiming that boundary. In 1764, the board of trade extended the limits of West Florida towards the parallel 32º and a bit more. [59] This change appears to be arbitrary [60] and on the paper.[61] and even within the claims of Georgia [62] That colonial frontier was different from the demarcation of the Indians: [63] But colonial claims meant nothing while Native Americans still controlled their own land and their own affairs. In subsequent years treaties and agreements of the British were made with the Indian nations to establish the real demarcation.[64][65][66] The line in the parallel 32º appears as a territorial claim The article 2 of the treaty of Natchez (May 1792): [67] begin in the west on the Mississippi River [and extend] to the mouth of the Yazú River and go up to the middle of this river until near the place called [the] Ball Field (juego de Pelota) where the English Nation, in agreement with the Chacta Nation, marked a dividing line that continued [south] until entering west Florida and following the same line from the mentioned Ball Field until encountering the ones that separate the rest of the dominios of His Catholic Majesty with Alibamone and Talapuche Nations. refers to the dividing line marked by the British previously in 1777. In this year, Indians yielded a narrow strip attached to the Mississippi, which is nothing more and nothing less than Natchez district: [68] Natchez, where a body of loyalist had bought of the Choctaws, in 1777, a strecht along the river from 31º to the mouth of the Yazoo, a distance of something over one hundred miles. [69] the Natchez district is bounded to the westward by the river Mississippi, and extends from Loftus Cliff up the said river to the mouth of the Yazoo, the distance being 110 miles. The said District was purchased from the Choctaw nation by the British superintendent of Indian affairs at a treaty held at Mobile in May 1777, and the lines as above described were marked and surveyed by me in 1779. This description it must be observed contains no eastern boundary. [70] Se empezó la demarcación, y al llegar al paralelo 32° los indios no quisieron continuar, basándose en que iban a perder unas tierras que apreciaban mucho sobre el Yazú, llamadas el «Juego de Pelota». [71] a boundary was established between the Natchez District and the Choctaw Nation in 1777. [72] the tribe [Choctaw] had sold a part o its territory along the Mississippi to the English in 1777. When the West Florida was conquered and transferred to Spain, Natchez district was held: [73] The Spanish Natchez District was similar in its geographic and administrative lines to the old British district. Its boundary was approximately the same. [74][75] The Natchez District extended upon the east side of the Mississippi River for about one hundred miles, and was bounded on the east by a line extending direct from the sources of the Tickfaw, in a direction west of north to the Yazoo River ten miles above its mouth. No portion of this district extended more than twenty five miles direct from the river. [76] In the 18th century, the district of Natchez occupied a very extensive area located in western Florida, between Pony coupée on the south and the Yazoo River on the north. [77] From 1781 until 1798, the land on the east bank of the Mississippi River, from the mouth of the Yazoo river southward to the 31st degree W latitude, was claimed and occupied by Spain. The area was called the Natchez district [78] El distrito de Natchez, que se extendía desde Punta Cortada (Ponte Coupée) en el Sur, hasta la desembocadura del río Yazoo, en el norte; desde el Mississsippi, en el Oeste; hasta una frontera indeterminada en el Este. [79] Natchez district formed a part of this province, extending from the Yazoo to Bayou Sara. →→Forts on the Tombigbee river: St.Stephens and Confederacion [80] To protect Americans from Indian attacks in the spring of 1789, Vivente Folch, the Spanish commadant at Mobile, ordered construction of a fort at the head of navigation on the Tombigbee River. Fort San Esteban, as it was called in Spanish for Governor Esteban Miro, translated in English to fort St-Stephens. [...] evacuated by the spanish in 1799. [81] Juan de la Villebeuvre was able to negociate a treaty with the Choctaws by the terms of which other choice strategic points in Alabama on the Tombigbee River were ceded to Spain for the construction of Forts San Esteban de Tombecbee and Confederación. [82] The treaty of Boukfouka, signed on May 10, 1793, gave the Spaniards thisty arpents of land on which to build a fort. It would go up at the site of the old French fort, Tombecbé, and would be named Confereración to celebrate the alliance of the Spaniards and the Indians. §South America: It has been taken the maximum demarcation of borders as indicates the en:First Treaty of San Ildefonso (1777), and later fixed by Hispanic-Portuguese commissions. [83] Meanwhile, prolonged negotiations over the boundary between Spanish and Portuguese territory in South America resulted in the Treaty of San Ildefonso of October 1, 1777. To demarcate the boundary, Spain and Portugal nemd commisions in 1780. [84] A more precise demarcation was, however, undertaken in the Spanish-Portuguese treaty of Madrid of 13 January 1750 and that of Ildefonso of 1 October 1777 by which the borderline was in part fixed along rivers, such as the Río de la Plata and the River Uruguay. Why not Patagonia: Though there are laws which establish the Spanish jurisdiction over the Patagonia, also those same sources establish the Spanish jurisdiction over the continental part of China. Here you are the secondary sources that use the Laws of Indies to indicate the theoretical extensions of the Audiencia of Chile [85] and the Audiencia of Manila [86], and it is possible to check them with the text of the Laws of the Indies [87]. Thus, I take the Recopilación de Leyes de los Reynos de las Indias, libro II, título XV [88], and the law XII indicates the limits of the Audiencia y Chancilleria Real de Santiago de Chile: «y tenga por distrito todo el dicho Reyno de Chile, con las Ciudades, Villas, Lugares y tierras, que se incluyen en el gobierno de aquellas Provincias, assi lo que ahora está pacifico y poblado, como lo que se reduxere, poblare y pacificare dentro y fuera del Estrecho de Magallanes, y la tierra adentro, hasta la Provincia de Cuyo, inclusivé.» (which will have for district all of said Kingdom of Chile, with the cities, towns, places and lands, which are included in the government of those provinces, including what is now pacified and populated, as well as what shall be subdued, populated and pacified inside and outside the Straits of Magellan and inland to the Province of Cuyo, inclusive.). We read that Patagonia would belog to Chile when the territory shall be subdued, populated and pacified. But in addition to that in the same page we read the law XI about the limits of the Audiencia y Chancilleria Real de Manila en las Filipinas: «y tenga por distrito la dicha Isla de Luzon, y todas las demás de las Filipinas, Archipiélago de la China, y la Tierrafirme della, descubierta, y por descubrir» (and which shall have for district said Island of Luzon, and the rest of the Philippines, the Archipelago of China, and its Mainland, discovered and to be discovered.), such reference is quoted by the Spanish ministry of overseas in 1866 indicating the same, that [89] : «el distrito de la Real Audiencia que en ella asiste según se declara por providencias de 5 de Mayo de 1583 y de 26 de Mayo de 1596 es la isla de Luzón con todas las Filipinas del archipiélago de la China que incluye los cinco referidos y la tierra firme de ella descubierta y por descubrir que es distancia inmensa.» Tierrafirme is the continental part of China, thus we have that the same juridical fundament that establishes that Patagonia belonged to Chile (and so to the Crown of Castile), it establishes that China belonged to the Philippines (and so to the Crown of Castile), and subsequently China would be Spanish. Nevertheless such juridical conclusion is fictious, and a sophism that it has neither application nor equivalence in the facts. Unlike in the rest of Spanish America, there are not an international treaty of delimiting border or international agreement over Patagonia, and the sources establish not colonial rule in this zone. Since the Spanish could not conquer Patagonia (due to en:Arauco War), so it never formed to part of the Spanish territory. So much so that Patagonia appears as an independent territory in maps of the 19th century 1823 1831 1842, posterior to the Spanish presence. [90]: Nearly all of the territory south of this boundary - roughly defined by the military outposts linking the colonial settlements of Buenos Aires, San Luis, Mendoza, Santiago, and Concepcion - remained free of Spanish colonial rule. With the exception of a few heavily defended Spanish outposts along the Atlantic and Pacific coasts, native peoples claimed and enjoyed sovereignty in this vast region known as Patagonia by the Europeans, It was not until the late nineteenth century that the pampas grasslands, the Patagonian steppes, and the southern cordilleran highlands of the Andes (called Araucania) fell under the political dominion of the Argentine and Chilean states. [91] Although the Spanish Royal Crown soon designated an Adelantado to explore and conquer these southern lands, the European and Creole occupation beyond the Salado River - only 200 kilometres south of Buenos Aires- took centuries. After the second and definitive foundation of Buenos Aires in 1580, almost two hundred years would elapse before the establishment of new Spanish settlements in Patagonia. [...] Difficulties in advancing the colonial frontier hence added to the strong sense of boundaries that persisted well into the nineteeth century. [92] Spanish Royal Crown could not advance the frontier south of the Buenos Aires-Mendoza-Santiago line-and, comparatively speaking, this line suffered only minor alterations during the rule of the emerging Creole governments. [93]: Twenty years later the Crown began to construct a line of military forts across the region from northwest to southesat, thereby doubling the amount of land open to Spanish occupation. The area circunscribed by these forts, an ellipse approximately 80 to 100 miles wide by 485 miles long, ran from Arroyo del Medio to the nortwest of the city to the mouth of the Río Salado to the southeast. These forts - Rojas, Pergamino, Slato, Areco, Luján, Navarro, Lobos, Monte, Pilar de los Ranchos and Chascomús, - and their nearby rural population comprised the city's immediate hinterland. Beyond them to south and west lay hostile Indian territory. [...] While the colonial authorities were able to increase the amount of land within thier effectively controlled area, it was not until 1822 that control of the land up to the Salado passed from Indian to Spanish hands. [94] La frontera corría a lo largo de ciento cincuenta y cinco leguas (poco menos de novecientos kilómetros), guardando Buenos Aires. La Línea de defensa estaba formada por seis fuertes guarnecidos de blandengues y cinco fortines ocupados por las milicias rurales, a ración y sin sueldo. La distribución era así: fuerte de Chascomús, guardia de Ranchos, guardia del Monte, fortín de Lobos, fortín de Navarro, guardia de Luján, fortín de Areco, guardia del Salto, guardia de Rojas, fortín Mercedes, fortín Melincué, en Santa Fe. Esta línea se mantendría hasta después de 1810. [...] A la larga, la frontera sur se estabilizó, como lo hicieron las otras del reino: en Córdoba, la marca se plantó en el río Cuarto; en Mendoza, en el valle de Uco. [95]: Así la línea de defensa, sobre una frontera de 155 leguas, quedó integrada por seis fuertes custodiados por blandengues y cinco fortines defendidos por milicias. El cordón de guardias quedaba integrado pues, por los fuertes de Chascomús, Ranchos, Monte, Luján, Salto y Rojas, y los fortines de Lobos, Navarro, reco, Mercedes y Melincué. [96] The southern colonial frontier linking Mendoza, San Luis and Río Cuarto east of the cordillera remained the same, but south of Buenos Aires the newly reauthoized Spanish militia negotiated peace treaties with Pampas bands that allowed Spanish settlement of lands north of the Salado River. Also, there are sources that indicate the failure of the extension of the Spanish settling in Patagonia, remaining limited the Spanish settling up to the river Bío-bío, though a small new colonizing impulse towards the south occurred during the 18th century. [97]: El territorio efectivamente colonizado por los españoles se extendía desde el pequeño valle del río Copiapó, donde termina el desierto de Atacama, hasta la gran hoya hidrográfica del Bío Bío en cuyo vértice noroccidental estaba asentada las ciudad de Concepción. [98]: Los límites entre el Chile español y el mapuche se marcan por la Frontera. La zona de la Frontera se fijó en 1598 después de la derrota de los españoles frente a los araucanos y la retirada de los primeros a la frontera norte del río Bío-Bío. Esta división duró todo el período colonial. Since in the agreements we do not read anything about the culmination of the enterprise, I am going to continue providing sources about on the effective settling over the territory: [99] Al regreso de su viaje a Perú, en abril de 1549, Pedro de Valdivia se abocó a la tarea de extender la dominación hacia el sur, rico en población, tierras y oro. Llegó al río Bíobío y en la bahía de Talcahuano fundó Concepción del Nuevo Extremo el 3 de marzo de 1550. Un nuevo mundo pleno de vegetación y densamente poblado se abrió ante los ojos españoles. Ansiosos de dominarlo fundaron nuevas ciudades [...]. And the text continues with the established cities, which we can see in a map in the following page 45. In the page 48: El fallecimiento del gobernador encendió una sublevación general. [...] El territorio al sur del Bíobío había sido perdido por los españoles. El fuerte de Arauco se abandonó en 1604. Cansada la corona de una lucha estéril, que le costaba más que la conquista de toda América, aceptó el plan del padre Luis de Valdivia (1560-1642) para pacificar a los araucanos mediante la evangelización y la suspensión del servicio personal. Una línea de fuertes, a lo largo del río Bíobío, protegería la población hispana de incursiones indígenas.. [100]: La conquista de Chile por los españoles empezó en 1536, pero éstos jamás lograron su propósito de imponer la soberanía de su monarca en la Araucanía, siendo en este sentido una tarea inconclusa. [...] Es efectivo, sin embargo, que a principios del siglo XVII, la estategia colonizadora experimentó un cambio que permite hablar de una nueva fase de la ocupación hispana, en la cual los españoles se desisten de afianzar la conquista del sur del país y deciden concentrar sus esfuerzos en la colonización de la zona comprendida desde la Serena a Concepción [...] El pragmatismo de Ribera, nombrado nuevo gobernador en 1612, debió articularse su proyecto de "guerra defensiva", consistente en procurar la conversión de los araucanos mediante prédicas y buen trato, absteniéndose de atacarlos en sus tierras. Ambos coincidían en consolidar el dominio español hasta la frontera del Bío Bío. [101] En el período intermedio entre los dos alzamientos, se fundaron nuevas ciudades a ambos lados de los Andes. Varias al sur del Bío-Bío, que pasó a ser la zona más rica y poblada del reino [...] El segundo alzamiento general tuvo consecuencias desastrosas. Comprendió la zona sur del Bío-Bío hasta el Toltén, habitada por los fieros mapuches. [...] Todo el territorio del Bío-Bío hasta Valdivia quedó en poder de estos indios de guerra. Se estableció una frontera entre ellos y el reino de Chile. [...] En el curso del siglo XVII, Chile se recupera penosamente de la catástrofe de 1598. Poco a poco se eleva el número de partidos de diez a catorce. Pero los nuevos no suponen ninguna ampliación territorial. [...] A raíz del alzamiento general de 1598 y de la pérdida de las ciudades del sur, se estableció un ejécito permanenete para defender la frontera que se fijó en el Bío-Bío. Only remained a few small outposts [102] [103] to justify the presence of Spaniards in the depicted points on the coast, during a small period, sourced as enclaves: [104]: en tiempos de Carlos III se desarrolla un plan de colonización estableciendo tres enclaves en puntos estratégicos de la costa patagónica. Estos fueron Nuestra Señora del Carmen en Río Negro, su subsidiario el Fuerte San José y la Nueva Colonia y Fuerte de Floridablanca en San Julián [105], y la instalación de un enclave avanzado sobre la desmbocadura del Río Negro, el fuerte El Carmen. Even in 1869 Carmen de Patagones continued being an enclave, but belonging to Argentina. [106]: En 1869 el británico George Charworth Muster viajó desde Punta Arenas con una partida de Aonikenk o Tewelche (identificados como patagones en la época), rumbo a Carmen de Patagones en las márgenes del Kurüleufu (río Negro) un puerto de intercambio y enclave militar de la provincia de Buenos Aires en el Puelmapu. Why not Amazonia: The claim of Tordesillas is not depicted ([107] It was from these vantage points that conflicting Spanish and Portuguese activity and contested claims of sovereignty were played out in the interior of South America.), since the same treaty did not establish any border in the soil (which was done from 1750) but vague and claimed spheres of influence: España: Reflexiones sobre el ser de España, written by Real Academia de la Historia (1997), page 323: La línea meridiana de Alejandro VI, o el tratado de Tordesillas, al dividir el mundo en dos zonas de interés, portuguesa y castellana, había venido a consagrar la dualidad de las dos Monarquías.the meridian line of Alexander VI, or the treaty of Tordesillas, dividing the world into two zones of interest, Portuguese and Spanish, had come to embody the duality of the two monarchies. A Nation Upon the Ocean Sea: Portugal's Atlantic Diaspora and the Crisis of the Spanish Empire, 1492-1640, written by Daviken Studnicki-Gizbert, Oxford University Press (2007) page 36 The empire constitued a global unity, one that fused the colonial spheres of Portugal and Castile split by the Treaty of Tordesillas in 1493. A History of Portuguese Overseas Expansion, 1400-1668, written by M. D. D. Newitt; Routledge (2005) page 56 The famous Treaty of Tordesillas, the first of two signed on 7 June 1494. By the terms of this agreement Portugal retained its claims to lands and and oceans up to a line 370 leagues west of Cape Verde while Castile could claim rights over lands so far to the west... De los límites a la frontera: o los malentendidos de la geopolítica amazónica, Jean Claude Roux, Revista de indias Vol LXI, No 223 (2001): Sin embargo, frente al carácter poco realista de esta delimitación que ignoraba la geografía de las nuevas tierras, el tratado de Tordesillas de 1494 concluido entre España y Portugal, otorgaba a los portugueses una sensible extensión de sus derechos territoriales de 370 leguas al Oeste.Nevertheless, opposite to the slightly realistic character of this delimiting which ignored the geography of the new lands, the treaty of Tordesillas of 1494 concluded between Spain and Portugal, it granted to the Portuguese a sensitive extension of his territorial rights of 370 leagues in the western part. A History of Portuguese Overseas Expansion, 1400-1668, written by M. D. D. Newitt; Routledge (2005) page 57 The two treaties of Alcaçovas and Tordesillas are of major significance in the development of the modern world order. Although it has been argued that the diplomats who negociated the Tordesillas agreement were concerned only with the Atlantic Ocean and its islands, the treaty soon became the basis on with claims to sovereignty were extended over lands and peoples noy only unconquered but even undiscovered. Las relaciones luso-hispánicas en torno a las Misiones orientales del Uruguay: de los orígenes al tratado de Madrid 1750, revista Fronteras de la Historia año/vol. 8 (2003) [108]:Cuando D. Joao II subió al trono, el tratado de Alcaçovas hacía poco se había firmado, dos años antes, en 1479, definiendo la sucesión de Castilla y delimitando las 'zonas de influencia al sur de la península ibérica: el golfo de Guinea fue reservado a Portugal. Esta delimitación de zonas influencia fue el principio de una práctica diplomática que iría ampliándose durante más de tres siglos y medio y que acabaría por exigir casi una docena de nuevos tratados. Este acuerdo fue un marco de referencia, en el sentido de que fue uno de los primeros en establecer zonas de influencia entre las potencias When D. Joao II ascended the throne, Alcaçovas treaty had been signed recently, two years before, in 1479, defining the succession of Castile and delimiting the areas of influence to the south of the Iberian peninsula: the gulf of Guinea was reserved to Portugal. This delimitation of zones influence was the beginning of a diplomatic practice that would go there being extended during more than three centuries and a half and that would finish for demanding almost a dozen of new treaties. This agreement was a frame of reference, to the effect that he was one of the first ones in establishing zones of influence between the powers. To reinforce the idea that the Treaty of Tordesillas did not assign territories to a country, but claims to incorporate territories to a country, it is that a demarcation of borders was not carried out until 1750. We will see that: El segundo viaje colombino, León Guerrero, Mª Montserrat's Doctoral thesis. Universidad de Valladolid (2000), pages 406 and 408 Hemos visto que en el tratado firmado el 7 de junio de 1494 se establece un periodo de diez meses para que expertos lusos y castellanos establezcan la localización de la "raya". [...] A pesar de los esfuerzos realizados por los monarcas castellanos, el plazo de diez meses se prorrogó indefinidamente.We have seen that in the treaty signed on June 7, 1494 establishes a period of ten months in order that Portuguese and Castilian experts establish the location of the "raya" (boundary). [...] In spite of the efforts realized by the Castilian monarches, the term of ten months was extended indefinitely. Disertación Histórica y Geográfica sobre el Meridiano de Demarcación entre los dominios de España y Portugal written by Jorge Juan y Santacilia and Antonio de Ulloa (1749) [109]: ...por la parte del oriente el meridiano, ó línea de demarcacion que divide los países de la corona de Castilla de los de Portugal; pero quedaron estos dudosos ó confusos allí por no haberse expresado los que lo son en realidad, nacido esto de no haberse hasta el presente determinado con formalidad por qué parte corta la tierra este meridiano.... on the part of the east the meridian, or line of demarcation that divides the countries of the crown of Castile of those of Portugal; but these remained these doubtful or confused there for not having expressed those which are them really, originated this from not to have be up to the present determined with formality wherefore part divides the land this meridian. Tan constante ha sido esta duda en la serie de los tiempos que nunca ha logrado declararse con la precision y exactitud que se requería, y así aunque varios autores geógrafos é historiadores hayan hablado de ella, no resolviéndola ninguno perfectamente, es forzoso se mantenga suspenso el juicio, ceñido solo á la noticia de haber un meridiano así llamado de demarcacion, y á las de sus fundamentos y controversias, pero sin llegar á conocer los parajes en que debe entenderse situado; punto principal que se necesita investigar para que con su inteligencia pueda saberse con firmeza qué países son los que legítimamente corresponden á los de Portugal.So constant it has been this doubt in the series of the times that it has never managed to declare itself with the precision and accuracy that it was needed, and this way, though several authors geographers and historians have spoken about it, not solving any perfectly, it is necessary it must be maintained pending the judgment, encircled only to the news of having a meridian so-called of demarcation, and at those of its bases and controversies, but without coming to know the places with which it should be understood placed; main point that it is necessary to investigate in order that with its knowledge there could be known by firmness what countries are those that legitimately belong to Portugal. Due to the lack of definition of the demarcation, the spheres of expansion was not respected and Portugal was which carried out the effective occupation of the zone: In the Centro Argentino de Estudios Internacionales, we see in this article: El Tratado de Tordesillas fue aprobado por el Pontífice. Sin embargo, las dificultades entonces existentes para medir los meridianos y la ambigüedad del documento -que no aclaraba si se debía medir la distancia en leguas españolas o portuguesas que eran distintas y desde cuál isla-, dejaron en pie de duda el alcance de los derechos concedidos y, en consecuencia, Castilla y Portugal se dispusieron a asegurar sus jurisdicciones mediante la efectiva ocupación de los territorios, conquistando regiones que consideraban asignadas en virtud de dicho acuerdo. The treaty of Tordesillas was approved by the Pontiff. Nevertheless, the difficulties existing at the time to measure the meridians and the ambiguity of the document - that it did not clarify if it had to measure the distance in Spanish or Portuguese leagues that were different and from which island-, they left in doubt the scope of the granted rights and, in consequence, Castile and Portugal prepared to assure its jurisdictions by means of the effective occupation of the territories, conquering regions that they were considering to be assigned by virtue of the above mentioned agreement. Complaint by Jorge Juan and Antonio Ulloa [110]: cuanto el Marañón corre hasta el rio Negro no ha conocido otros conquistadores que los PP de la Companía de Jesus de la corona de Castilla, y que todas las naciones que pueblan aquel vasto espacio, se entregaron al yugo del vasallaje de los reyes de Castilla, ántes que el de algun otro príncipe, y que así no hay razon ni fundamento por donde pueda introducirse el derecho de conquista ni de posesion en ellos, á favor de los Portugueses, quienes no obstante lo tienen ocupado valiéndose para su detentacion de los medios del hecho y de la fuerza que se van á expresar. (As the en:Marañón River flows until the Black river has not known other conquerors that the Fathers of the en:Society of Jesus from the Crown of Castile, and that all nations that inhabit this vast space, were delivered to the yoke of vassalage of kings of Castile, before that of any other prince, and so there is neither reason nor basis where one could introduce the right of conquest and possession of them, for the Portuguese, who nevertheless they have occupied using for possession of the means and the fact that the force that it will express them) The father en:Samuel Fritz went to the Audiencia of Quito, where he exposed in 1692: Que el descubrimiento deste gran río de Amazonas, hecho el año de mil seiscientos y treinta y nueve por orden de la Majestad Católica de Felipe IV, que está en gloria, por la comisión dada al padre Cristóbal de Acuña, de la Compañía nuestra, de tal suerte se embarazó (Quedar impedido), que, pasado ya más de cincuenta años, no se ha hecho operación ninguna, o para ganar y asegurar las posesiones deste gran río, o para conquistar las naciones que habitan sus tierras y reducirlas a nuestra santa fe. Yo, por el derecho que adquirió de tantos años la Compañía de Jesús en la conquista de los gentiles deste río de Amazonas, fui enviado el año de mil seiscientos ochenta y seis, por orden de mis superiores a la provincia de Omaguas a doctrinar y reducirlos a la fe católica. Treinta y ocho aldeas son, entre pequeñas y mayores, situadas en islas de Amazonas, las cuales todas, con otras muchas aldeas de diferentes naciones, recibieron, con grande consuelo mío, el Evangelio de Jesucristo sin alzamiento ni contradicción alguna. Pero como las conquistas espirituales están vinculadas con las posesiones temporales, por no haber hasta ahora, de parte de la Corona de España, asegurado las posesiones temporales de este río de Amazonas, me hallo agora en la conquista espiritual, por lo que pretenden deste río, totalmente atajado de los portugueses del Gran Pará, en lo cual, por no hacer cosa fuera de mi instituto, no me entrometo (That the discovery of this great river Amazonas, done the year one thousand six hundred and thirty nine on order of the Catholic Majesty Philip IV, who is in glory, for the assignmentgiven to the father Cristóbal de Acuña, of our Society, of such fate he was disabled, that, which spent already more than fifty years, it has not done any operation to to win and to secure the possessions of this great river, or to conquer the nations that inhabit its lands and to reduce them to our holy faith. I, on the right that the Society of Jesus acquired many years ago in the conquest of the gentiles of this Amazon river, I was sent the year one thousand six hundred and eighty six, on order of my superiors to the province of Omaguas and to indoctrinate and to abridge them to the Catholic faith. Thirty eight villages are, between small and larger, placed in islands of The Amazon, which all, with many other villages of different nations, received, with big my consolation, the Gospel of Jesus Christ, without any contradiction or uprising. But as the spiritual conquests they are linked with the temporary possessions, due to it has not been so far, on behalf of the Crown of Spain, secured the temporary possessions of this river Amazon, I am found myself in the spiritual conquest, for what they claim of this river, totally fear of the Portuguese of the Great Pará, in which, for not doing anything out of my ministry, I do not meddle.)

EUROPA. It is depicted the territories of the Spanish Habsburgs: Castile, Aragon, Balearic Islands, Sardinia, Sicily, Naples, en:State of Presidi, Milan, Siena, Piombino, Finale, Franche-Comté, Charolais, and en:Seventeen Provinces.

OCEANIA:

• It is marked the Caroline Islands, Marianas, Palau and Guam.
• Santa Cruz (nowadays in Nendö Island) : [111] Established a settlement on an island that they named Santa Cruz. [112] He retourned in 1595, stopping en route to discover and name the marquesas Islands in eastern Polynesia. This time Mensaña landed on Nendo, in the santa Cruz group, where he hoped to found a Spanish colony.
• New Jerusalem (nowadays in [[:en:Espiritu Santo|Espiritu Santo island) [113] On 30 April [1606] he apparently entered the Big Bay of Espiritu Santo; he named the bay San Felipe and San Iago. At the head of the bay he founded the town of New Jerusalem [...] The colony had therefore to be abandoned and, at the beginning of June, Quiros and his ships left the town of New Jerusalem. [114]: On an island he called Espiritu Santo (Holy Spirit), Quiros established a doomed colony: New Jerusalem. [115] Except for Quiros, who dreamed of expanding Spain's empire in the Western Pacific and made an unsuccessful attempt to establish a settlement (a New Jerusalem) on Santo at the mouth of the river which he named the Jordan.

• Isla of Amat (nowadays Tahiti): [116] INFORMATION ACQUIRED from the natives of the Island of Amat (by them called Otajity). [117] Rodriguez, Maximo 1775 Daily narrative kept by the interpreter at the Island of Amat, otherwise Otahiti, in the year 1774. [118] It was next visited by Don Domingo Boenechea, on board a Spanish frigate, the Aguila. He thought he would like a new name, so he called Tahiti the island of "Amat". [119] El día 5 de enero de 1775 se celebró una reunión en la casa-misión de Tautira entre los oficiales españoles y los principales jefes de Tahití. En dicho acto se reconoció entre otros asuntos la soberanía española sobre las islas y la defensa de sus habitantes, quienes a su vez declaraban lealtad y obediencia al rey de España. [120]

NORTH OF AFRICA: Including the fort seats of Oran-Mazalquivir, Algiers, Bujía, Bizerta, The Goleta-Tunis, and Tripoli; in the Atlantic Ocean, La Mamora together with the Portuguese places of Tangier, Mazagán and Agadir. with different color (another epoch) en:Spanish Morocco, Ifni, the en:Spanish Sahara, and en:Spanish Guinea. As for emirate of Adrar, it is not depicted, because the Spanish government of Sagasta did not ratify the treaty. [121] Entretanto en 1884, se declara protectorado la zona comprendida entre Cabo Blanco y Cabo Bojador por el gobierno español. Yane 1880 la sociedad Geográfica Comercial organiza un expedicición con julio Cervera, Quiroga, Rizzo y el Hach Abdelkader u Ajdar. En Idyil tomaron posesión del territorio "con el beneplácito de los jefoes de la qabilas y también del emir de Adrar". Mas el gobierno español no reconoció tal actuación y este territorio fue ocupado por los franceses como se verá en el tratado de 1900. [122] y en 1884 comunicó a las potencias extranjeras que España colocaba bajo su protectorado el territorio comprendido entre los Cabos Bojador y Blanco. Dos años después tuvo lugar la exploración de José Álvarez Pérez, que reconoció la costa entre Cabo Bojador y el río Orea, la expedición de Cervera Quiroga, que penetró hasta el Adrar Temar y la salinas de Luil, sin que el Gobierno español estableciera protectorado sobre aquellas regiones.

With respect of the the odd mixing of colors in Fernando Poo y Annobon it is very simple: both islands were Portuguese until 1778 [123], hence Portuguese between 1581-1640 (blue color), afterwards both islands were Spanish and lost in 1968, so both islands are depicted with green color too. Similar case is Arzila, Portuguese until 1589 [124] [125], and is depicted with blue color, but also Arzila belonged to the Spanish protectorate in Morocco, lost in 1956, and depicted green too. Ceuta was Portuguese until 1640 (blue color), and nowadays is Spanish (color brown too). Oran and Mazalquivir wast lost during the en:War of the Spanish Succession in 1708, regained in 1732 both were sold in 1791.

PHILIPPINES. It is marked the Philippines and the forts of Taiwan in Tamsui and Keelung: [126] Another post was founded at Tamsui in 1629. The Spanish built a very solid stone fortress at Keelung and fairly substantial fortifications at Tamsui, and, in 1628, were reported to have 200 Spanish and 400 Filipino soldiers at Keelung, probably more than the Dutch could have mustered in the south. , [127] In 1623 the Spanish (based on Manila) had built forts and missions at Keelung and Tamsui. Why not Borneo: In the magazine Berceo, we see this article page 167 that the Captain General indicated the disadvantages of conquering Sulu Sultanate, since "it is branched out inside the limit of the Dutch pretensions". It seems to refer to Sultan's tributary zones in the north of Borneo ("está ramificado dentro del límite de las pretensiones holandesas". Parece referirse a las zonas tributarias del Sultán en el norte de Borneo); and in the page 171 a treaty of friendship between Spain and Sulu of 1836 refers to the whole extension of islands that are situated inside the limit of the Spanish right and run from the western top of Mindanao up to Borney and the Paragua, with the exception of Sandacán and other tributary lands of the Sultan in the firm land of borney (toda la extensión de Islas que se hallan dentro del límite del derecho español y corren desde la punta occidental de mindanao hasta Borney y la Paragua, con la excepción de Sandacán y las demás tierras tributarias del sután en la tierra firme de borney) , so the island of Borneo did not belong to the claim of Spain in that moment. The problem takes root in the relation between Sulu and the north of Borneo, for example the Pope was the suzerain of the kingdom of Naples, but Naples did not belong to Papal States, the kingdoms of Taifa were tributaries of the Christian Spanish kingdoms, but not because of it they belonged to the Christian Spanish kings. April 30, 1851, containing the Act of Incorporation of Sulu into the Spanish Monarchy page 224, but its lack of application [128], instigated to Germany and UK to agree with Spain a commercial protocol in 1877, after which Spain renewed its sovereignty on Sulú in 1878 [129]. Was the north of Borneo included? For the British , [130] Spaniards would try to claim north Borneo, and no time should be lost to prevent...the Spaniards fron adquiring the Sulu possesions on the mainland of Borneo. In view of the British interests, and their reluctancy to accepting the agreement of 1878, [131] the Spanish government answered that his government had no intention of occupying north-east Borneo, but could not abandon its suzerainty over the Sultan, whose possesions extended to north-east Borneo., and again, As for Borneo, Spain never intended to occupy it, he repeated. It would, however, maintain its rights to sovereignty in parts tributary to the Sultan. Finally, in the Britain-Spain-Germany agreement of March 1885. Its basis was the recognition of Spanish sovereignty in the islands, and the withdrawal of Spanish claims in respect of Sulu's claims in northern Borneo [132] Hereby according to article III of the treaty of 1885, North Borneo was a Spanish claim, and therefore it is not shaded in the map. Here another detailed map [133] Why not New Guinea: There were a few navigators' claim that stopped the coasts, but without any later attempt of effective administration.

PORTUGUESE EMPIRE. -Why is depicted the Portuguese empire?: In the political configuration of Spain of the XVIth and XVIIth centuries, the Monarch had an administrative system of Councils and Juntas for helping him to take decisions in all his dominions, every territory had its particular administration, and retained its proper legislation. As every kingdom: Castile, Aragon ... had its specific administration, then this was not an exclusive issue of the Portuguese territory. Therefore it did not have two realms: the Kingdom of Portugal and Spain, nor two different administrations (there were more), one for Spain and another for Portugal on the other side. Really, actually, There was a common administration for the whole entire Monarchy, and several particular administrations (Castile, Aragon, Portugal ...) for each one of the territories. In the following sources they affirm that the internal constitution of the Spanish Monarchy (monarchy is the denomination of a set of territories) was based in the respect of the legislations, administrations and juridical systems of all the kingdoms and territories that were composing the Monarchy. Portugal was legally and juridically different, and also all the rest of kingdoms of the Monarchy were juridically and legally different one of others. It shouldn't confuse Spain with Castile because Castile was one of the kingdoms of Spain, and Portugal was a kingdom associated with Castile, but not independent, since Portugal also formed a part of Spain and its Monarchy, alongside Castile, Aragon, Flemish territories... The sources are: 1.-About the political configuration of Spain: Historia de España, vol 5, directed by es:Manuel Tuñón de Lara Ed. Labor, ISBN 84-335-9425-7 (page 196): «La España de los Austrias, lo mismo que la de los Reyes Católicos, no tiene unidad política». (Spain of the Austrias, the same as that of the Catholic Kings, it does not have political unit). Felipe IV: El hombre y el reinado, written by José N. Alcalá-Zamora, Real Academia de la Historia (Spain), published by CEEH página 137: «Así Felipe IV era cabeza de un conglomerado de coronas, reinos y estados de la más variada caracterización jurídica. Y en cada uno de ellos el monarca reinaba con diferente título y con distintos y desiguales poderes. [...] Coloquial y literariamente estaba extendida la expresión "Rey de España" o "de las Españas"; usándose indistinta y frecuentemente el singular y el plural, en latín y en castellano, en los documentos reales, ya fueran despachos o cartas. [...] Por otra parte, en la documentación privativa de los distintos reinos y estados se utilizaba en ocasiones sólo el título regio del territorio de que se tratara [...] Es precisamente esta -llamémosla- "constitución" interna de la Monarquía, que se fundamentaba en el estricto respeto a la configuración jurídica propia de los territorios que la integraban, la que intentó variar Olivares en su programa político.».(So, Philip IV was head of a conglomerate of crowns, kingdoms and states of the most diverse legal characterization. And in each of them, the monarch reigned with a different title and with different and unequal power [...] It was extended literary and colloquially the expression "King of Spain" or "the Spains", used indistinctly and frequently the singular one and the plural, in Latin and Castilian language, in the royal documents, they were offices or letters. [...] Furthermore, in the exclusive documentation of the different kingdoms and states, it is only occasionally used the royal title of the territory in question [...] It is precisely this - we call it- internal "constitution" of the monarchy, which was based on strict respect for the legal configuration of the territories that they integrated it, which Olivares tried to vary in his political agenda). España en Europa: Estudios de historia comparada: escritos seleccionados, by John Huxtable Elliott, Universitat de València (2002), pages 79-80 «Una parecida buena voluntad a aceptar disposiciones constitucionales e institucionales ya existentes había informado la política de Felipe II ante la unión de Castilla con Portugal. Siguiendo el tradicional estilo de los Habsburgo, esta unión de coronas de 1580 fue otra unión dinástica, aeque principaliter, cuidadosamente planificada para asegurar la supervivencia de la identidad portuguesa, así como la de su imperio» (A similar good will to accept constitutional and institutional already existing dispositions had informed Philip II's policy before the union of Castile with Portugal. Following the traditional style of the Hapsburg, this union of Crowns of 1580 was another dynastic union, aeque principaliter, carefully planned to assure the survival of the Portuguese identity, as well as that of its empire). España en Europa: Estudios de historia comparada: escritos seleccionados, by John Huxtable Elliott, Universitat de València (2002), page 182: «Durante 1640, las clases dirigentes en Cataluña y Portugal se mostraron dispuestas a apoyar una revuelta contra la autoridad real o participar en ella. Las precondiciones de este propósito parecen hallarse tanto en la estructura constitucional de la Monarquía española, con su incómoda combinación de gobierno centralizado y realeza absentista como en la politica seguida por Madrid en los veinte años precedentes» (During 1640, the leader classes in Catalonia and Portugal proved to be ready to support a revolt against the royal authority or to take part in it. The previous conditions of this intention seem to be situated so much in the constitutional structure of the Spanish Monarchy, with its inconvinient combination of centralized government and royalty absentee as in the politics followed by Madrid since twenty previous years). Handbook of Bureaucracy by Ali Farazmand, published by CRC Press (1994), [134]: «The nation of Spain resulted from the unification of Castile and Aragon in 1479, although both kingdoms retained their separate governments. At the time of Philip II (reg. 1556-1598) ascended to the throne, he became the ruler of a vast, widely scattered territory, including Spain, the Netherlands, the Two Sicilies, and a rapidly expanding empire in the New World. He added Portugal to his kingdom in 1580, thereby bringing the entire Iberian peninsula under his control. (pag 12) [...] Many of Philip's -and Spain's- problems arose from the highly decentralized nature of the empire. Within Spain proper, Aragon, Catalonia, and Valencia had their own laws and tax systems; Portugal retained its separate system from its incorporation in 1580 to its independence in 1640; and Sicily had its own legislature and tax structure. Naples and Milan were under more direct control from Madrid, and the Americas became a major source of revenue for the Crown after 1560». (page 13). Inside of Revista Criticón nº34 Université de Toulouse-Le Mirail, Trevor J. DADSON quotes in the page 7 of the file: «...de manera que aunque todas se juntan en V. Magestad, cada vna está distinta de la otra. Y como limites vnicos para distinguirlas, conserua V. M. entre ellas sus competencias».(So that, though all of them (the crowns) come together in V. Majesty, each one is different from the other. And only limits to distinguish retains V. M. including their competences). Castile is not the same concept that Spain: España en Europa: Estudios de historia comparada: escritos seleccionados, by John Huxtable Elliott, Universitat de València (2002), page 78: «Los castellanos, al poseer un imperio en las Indias y al reservarse los beneficios para sí mismos, aumentaron extraordinariamente su riqueza y poder en relación con sus otros reinos y provincias. [...] La posesión de un imperio de ultramar por una parte de la unión de la unión hizo que esa misma unión pensase en términos de dominación y subordinación, contrarios a la concepción que alentaba la supervivencia de una monarquía compuesta unida aeque principaliter. [...] Esto es lo que ocurrió a la Monarquía española del siglo XVI y principios del XVII, cuando los reinos y provincias no castellanos se vieron en clara y creciente desventaja con respecto a Castilla» (Castilians, on having possessed an empire in the Indies and on having saved the benefits for themselves, increased extraordinarily their wealth and power in relation with their other kingdoms and provinces. [...] The possession of an empire of overseas on one hand of the union of the union did that the same union was thinking about terms of domination and subordination, opposite to the conception that it was encouraging the survival of a compound united monarchy aeque principaliter. [...] This is what happened to Spanish Monarchy of the 16th century and beginning of the XVIIth, when the kingdoms and provinces not Castilians were in clear and increasing disadvantage with regard to Castile). Inside of Revista Criticón nº34 Université de Toulouse-Le Mirail, Trevor J. DADSON quotes in the pages 5-6 of the file: «Otro aspecto importante del memorial del pleito es la distinción que se hace constantemente entre Felipe III como Rey de la monarquía española y como Rey de Castilla. Felipe III tiene el deber de mantener los privilegios de la Corona de Castilla, pero, a la vez, la obligación cde velar por los intereses de la monarquía española en su totalidad.». (Another important aspect about the brief of the lawsuit is the distinction that is done constantly between Philip III like King of the Spanish monarchy and as King of Castile. Philip III has a duty to keep the privileges of the Crown of Castile, but at the same time, the obligation of ensure the interests of the Spanish monarchy as a whole). Central Government (Polisynodial system): Historia de España, vol 5, directed by es:Manuel Tuñón de Lara Ed. Labor, ISBN 84-335-9425-7 (page 201): «Las Alteraciones de Aragón ponen de relieve los límites del poder real fuera del territorio castellano, así como los sentimientos de los aragoneses, que consideraban a los castellanos como extranjeros. El poderío de Carlos V y, mucho más, el de Felipe II es impresionante y, sin embargo, llama la atención la falta de coherencia de aquel cuerpo inmenso, formado por varias naciones que no tienen la imprensión de pertenecer a una misma comunidad. El lazo lo constituye el monarca, asesorado por los Consejos territoriales: Consejo Real o Consejo de Castilla, Consejo de Indias, Consejo de Aragón, Consejo de Italia (separado del anterior en 1555), Consejo de Flandes, Consejo de Portugal... Existen organismos comunes: el Consejo de Guerra, el Consejo de Estado, pero que están vueltos más bien hacia los asuntos diplomáticos y militares.La gran política, la política exterior, es cosa exclusiva del soberano; a los pueblos solo se les exige que contribuyan con los impuestos» (The Alterations of Aragon emphasize the limits of the royal power out of the Castilian territory, as well as the feelings of the Aragonese, who were considering the Castilians as foreigners. The power of Carlos V and, much more, that of Philip II is impressive and, nevertheless, it calls the attention the lack of coherence of that immense body, formed by several nations that do not have the imprensión of belonging to the same community . The link is constituted by the monarch advised by the territorial Councils: Royal Council or Council of Castile, Council of The Indies, Council of Aragon, Council of Italy (separated from the previous one in 1555), Council of Flanders, Council of Portugal... Common organisms exist: the Council of War, the Council of State, but they are turned rather towards the diplomatic and military matters. The great politics, the foreign policy, is an exclusive issue of the sovereign one; only is demanded from the peoples that they contribute with the taxes). España en Europa: Estudios de historia comparada: escritos seleccionados, by John Huxtable Elliott, Universitat de València (2002), page 73: «La solución española de designar un consejo compuesto por consejeros autóctonos al servicio del rey palió en gran medida el problema, al proporcionar un foro en el que las opiniones y agravios locales pudieran manifestarse en la corte y el conocimiento local fuese tenido en cuenta a la hora de determinar una política. A un nivel más alto, el Consejo de Estado, compuesto en su mayor parte, pero no siempre en exclusiva, por consejeros castellanos, se mantenía en reserva como última instancia, al menos nominal, de toma de decisiones y de coordinación política atenta a los intereses de la monarquía en su totalidad. Esto no existía en la monarquía compuesta inglesa del siglo XVII» (The Spanish solution of designating an council composed by autochthonous counselors to the service of the king relieved to a great extent the problem, on having provided a forum in which the opinions and local damages could demonstrate in the court and the local knowledge was had in account at the moment of determining a policy. To a higher level, the Council of State, composed in its most, but not always in sole right, for Castilian counselors, it was kept in reserve as last instance, at least nominally, of making of decisions and of political coordination observant to the interests of the monarchy in its entirety. This did not exist in the compound English monarchy of the 17th century.) The New Cambridge Modern History: The Old Regime, 1713-1763 written by J. O. Lindsay, published by Cambridge University Press, 1957, page 147: «In Habsburg Spain the government had been carried on by a mass of councils of which the most important had been the Council of State, which advised the king on foreign affairs [...] Some councils dealt with the affairs of the Spanish dominions; these included the Council of Aragon, the Council of Italy, the Council of Flanders and the Council of the Indies, and for a time the Council of Portugal [...]». Aspects of European History, 1494-1789, written by Stephen J. Lee, published by Routledge (1984), pages 37-38 and I copy some fragments: «Yet, after the initial problem of the revolt of the comuneros of Castile in 1520, Spain continued to develop a basically stable constitution. The conciliar system, used by Ferdinand and Isabella to increase the power of the Crown, was the key. [...] The gradual acquisition of an overseas empire by Castille led to an additional territorial council. In 1524 the Council of the Indies was set up to supervise the administration of Spain's colonies in America, and was partially modelled on the Council of Castile [...] This assertion seems particularly appropiate to the period after 1580, when Spain acquired Portugal and a second overseas empire; [...]». The page 40 shows the Spanish Councils in the sixteenth century and that all these Councils did depend upon the Crown, and among them was the Council of Portugal with its viceroy, together with the Council of Aragon, of Flanders, of Castile ... Juan de Ovando: Governing the Spanish Empire in the Reign of Phillip II written by Stafford Poole and published by University of Oklahoma Press, 2004, pages 5-6-7 (page 5): «Though his son, Philip II (1556-98), is often styled king of Spain, and he thought of himself as such, his was not a unified state, nor was he an absolute monarch. The various kingdoms on the Iberian Peninsula had their own financial regulations, currencies and customs barriers. As John Lynch observed, Fernando and Isabel gave Spain a common government but not a common administrarion. The king rule varied in structure and power from kingdom to kingdom, city to city [...] Philip's power over Aragon was far more attenuated than it was over Castile. The various states were united only in the person of the king [...] (page 6) Philip administered his kingdoms though a series of councils whose number grew from eleven to fourteen during his reign. These were of two kinds: territorial and nonterritorial. First in importance among the territorial councils were the Council od Castile (which was also the supreme judicial court, established in 1480) and the Council of State (1523-24). The latter was concerned primarly with foreign affairs. The other territorial councils were the Indies (1524), Italy (1555), Portugal (1582), Flanders (1588) and Aragon (1494) [...] (page 7) In the last half of the sixteenth century, Castile emerged as the paramount force in the Spanish states and the one to which the good of the others was subordinated [...]». In a compilation of writings of the year 1788, we see Instrucción que se dio al Señor Felipe Quarto sobre materias de gobierno de estos reynos y sus agregados that in its page 211, we read «los reinos, señor, de Portugal son sin duda de lo mejor que hay en España» (the kingdoms, sir, of Portugal are undoubtedly the best there is in Spain), and in the pages 195-196 we have the general description of the polisynodial system of Councils, and especially in the page 196 we read: «Es el primero el Consejo Real, el de Cámara, el de Indias, el de Órdenes, el de Hacienda, el de Cruzada, respecto de las demás coronas agregadas a ésta, el de Aragón, el de Flandes, el de Portugal', el de Italia; está también el de la Inquisición, que es común a los reinos de Castilla, Aragón e Indias; y el de Estado, que es el primero, porque en él se tratan todas las materias universales de la Monarquía, que se constituyen de todos los reynos referidos, y que miran a la trabazón, y unión de todo este sujeto, que se compone de ellos.» (The first is the Royal Council, that of the Chamber, that of the Indies, that of the Orders, that of the Treasury, that of the Crusade, with respect of the other crowns aggregated to this one [(Castile)], that of Aragon, that of Flanders, that of Portugal, that of Italy, it is also the Council of the Inquisition, which is common to the kingdoms of Castile, Aragon and the Indies, and that of the State, which is the first one, because it addresses all the universal matters of the Monarchy, which are constituted of all the above-mentioned kingdoms and they (the universal matters) concern to the link, and and union of all this subject, which consists of them, which is composed of them (the kingdoms).). 2.-Portugal associated with Castile: La Europa dividida. 1559-1598, by J.H. Elliot, Ed. siglo XXI (1973) ISBN 84-323-0116-7 pages 284-285 writes: «Se acordó también que las instituciones políticas y representativas de Portugal deberían permanecer intactas, y que los castellanos tampoco debían ser autorizados a participar en la vida comercial de Portugal ni en la de su imperio. Estas concesiones de Felipe significaban que, aunque la península ibérica se había por fin unido en persona de un solo monarca, Portugal continuaba siendo incluso más que Aragón y cataluña, un Estado semiindependiente, asociado, no incorporado, a la Corona de Castilla [...] [Felipe] Consiguió también, y sin lucha, un segundo imperio imperio ultramarino: la India y África portuguesas, las Molucas y Brasil. Esto significaba un enorme aumento de poder para la monarquía española, la cual aparecía ante sus rivales como un coloso invencible montado encima del mundo» (It was also agreed that the political and representative institutions of Portugal should remain intact, and that Spanish should not be authorized to participate neither in the commercial life of Portugal, nor in that of its empire. These grants of Philip meant that, although the Iberian peninsula were finally joined into a single person of an alone monarch, Portugal continued to be, even more than Aragon and Catalonia, a semiindependent, associated, unincorporated to the Crown of Castile [...] [Philip] got also, and without fight, a second overseas empire: the Portuguese India and Africa, the Moluccas and Brazil. This meant a huge increase in power for the Spanish monarchy, which appeared before his rivals as an invincible colossus mounted over the world). España y sus Coronas. Un concepto político en las últimas voluntades de los Austrias hispánicos, Enrique San Miguel Pérez . Cuadernos de Historia del Derecho nº 3. págs. 253-270. Servicio de Publicaciones Universidad Complutense de Madrid, page 264, quotes Philip II's will (and others kings) «que los dichos reynos de la Corona de Portugal ayan siempre de andar y anden juntos y unidos con los reynos de la Corona de Castilla, sin que jamás se puedan dividir ni apartar» (That the above mentioned kingdoms of the Crown of Portugal exist always of going and go together and joined with the kingdoms of the Crown of Castile, without they could never divide nor separate ) 3.-Portugal as part of Spain and its Monarchy: España en Europa: Estudios de historia comparada: escritos seleccionados, by John Huxtable Elliott, Universitat de València (2002), page 190 «Cataluña, Portugal, Nápoles y Sicilia eran sociedades gobernadas por control remoto desde Madrid, y de modo más inmediato por los virreyes, que no podían compensar plenamente la ausencia de la persona regia. Todas ellas resultaron víctimas de las exigencias fiscales y militares de la Corona española» (Catalonia, Portugal, Naples and Sicily were societies governed by remote control from Madrid, and in a more immediate way for the viceroys, who could not compensate fullly the absence of the royal person. All of them they turned out to be victims of the fiscal requirements and military men of the Spanish Crown). page. 88 «¿Cómo se mantuvieron cohesionadas durante tanto tiempo uniones tan artificiales en origen y tan flexibles en organización? La contigüidad, como afirmaban sus contemporáneos, era indudablemente una gran ayuda, si bien resultó insuficientemente a la hora de mantener a Portugal dentro de la Monarquía española» (How were such artificial unions kept united during so much time in origin and so flexible in organization? The contiguity, as its contemporary ones were affirming, it was undoubtedly a great help, though it proved insufficiently at the moment of retaining Portugal inside the Spanish Monarchy) Historia y civilización: Escritos seleccionados by José María Jover Zamora, Marc Baldó i Lacomba and Pedro Ruiz Torres, published by Universitat de València (1997), page 79: «Felipe II perfeccionó la Monarquía con agregar la Corona de Portugal, y sus Indias Orientales á los restante de España» (Philip II perfected the Monarchy adding the Crown of Portugal, and their East Indies to the remaining Spanish (also in original quote). In the same page 79 is indicated: «enseguida tendremos ocasión de comprobar que es precisamente el problema de la unión entre las tres Coronas de los reinos peninsulares y ultramarinos de España lo que centra el interés, la inquietud y la angustia de nuestro escritor» (we will soon have occasion to verify that it is precisely the problem of the union between the three Crowns of the peninsular and overseas kingdoms of Spain which focuses the interest, the concern and the distress of our writer). In the page 81 says «La experiencia de 1640 deja todavía intacto el concepto de España como realidad peninsular; de nación española como gentilicio de aplicación común a castellanos, catalanes o portugueses» (The experience of 1640 makes the concept of Spain still intact as peninsular reality; of Spanish nation as national of common application to Castilians, Catalans or Portuguese). Inside the same book, page 77 and other historians as Elliot [135] appears Count-Duke's conception of Spain of institutionalizing and centralizing the monarchy, as well as explained in a memorandum addressed to King Philip IV: «Tenga Vuestra Majestad por el negocio más importante de su Monarquía el hacerse Rey de España; quiero decir que no se contente con ser Rey de Portugal, de Aragón, de Valencia, conde de Barcelona, sino que trabaje por reducir estos reinos de que se compone España al estilo y leyes de Castilla sin ninguna diferencia, que si Vuestra Majestad lo alcanza será el príncipe más poderoso del mundo» (For Your Majesty the most important business of State is to become King of Spain. I mean, Sire, that you should not be content to be King of Portugal, of Aragon, of Valencia and Count of Barcelona but you should direct all your work and thought, with the most experienced and secret advice, to reduce these realms which make up Spain to the same order and legal system as Castile, that if Your Majesty reaches it will be the most powerful prince of the world). In the page 77 of Jover's book, we read «Su audaz arbitrio apuntaba a una especie de consumación del movimiento renacentista encaminado a la reconstrucción de la España visigoda, centrada en torno a Castilla, fundiendo en un solo molde las tres Coronas destinadas a fundamentar la monarquía. Lo prematuro de tal propuesta quedará reflejado, cinco años más tarde, en unos párrafos de la Suplicación dirigida al mismo monarca por el portugués Lorenzo de Mendoza, allí donde alude a la unión de Reinos y Monarquía de Vuestra Majestad, que principalmente depende de estas tres Coronas de Castilla, Portugal y Aragón unidas y hermanadas» (His bold freewill pointed to a kind of consummation of the Renaissance movement directed to the reconstruction of the Visigothic Spain, centered around Castilla, merging into a single mold the three Crowns destined to support the monarchy. The premature of such will be reflected, five years later, in a few paragraphs of "Suplicación" addressed to the same monarch for the Portuguese Lorenzo of Mendoza, where he alludes to the union of Kingdoms and Monarchy of Your Majesty, who principally depends on these three Crowns of Castile, Aragon and Portugal joined and related). Atlas Histórico Mundial (its original title is DTV - Atlas zur Weltgeschichte) by Hermann Kinder and Werner Hilgemann, Ediciones Istmo (1986) ISBN 84-7090-005-6, page 253 we read: «Incorporación de Portugal a la Corona española. La fricción entre las políticas expansionistas de Castilla y Portugal había planteado a los Reyes Católicos el objetivo de la unión peninsular, perseguida mediante la unión de enlaces matrimoniales. 17-7-1580 Felipe II (nieto de Manuel I de Portugal por línea materna), ayudado por la hábil negociación de Cristóbal de Moura, es proclamado soberano. Días antes el pretendiente Antonio prior de Crato (apoyado por el pueblo y el bajo clero) se proclama rey (huyendo tras la entrada del ejército del duque de Alba y la amenaza de la escuadra del marqués de Santa Cruz). 16-4-1581 Las Cortes de Tomar reconocen soberano a Felipe II, que jura respetar todas las libertades portuguesas (lo cual cumple escrupulosamente). (Incorporation of Portugal to the Spanish Crown. The friction between the expansionist policies of Castile and Portugal had raised to the Catholic Kings the goal of the peninsular union, pursued through the union of matrimonial relationships. 17-7-1580 Philip II (grandson of Manuel I of Portugal by mother line), helped by Cristóbal de Moura's skilful negotiation, is proclaimed sovereign. Days before the claimant Antonio prior of Crato (supported by the people and the lesser clergy) is proclaimed a king (fleeing after the entry of the duke of Alba's army and the threat of the Marquess of Santa Cruz's squadron). 16-4-1581 The Cortes of Tomar acknowledges Philip II as sovereign, who swears to respect all the Portuguese freedoms (which performs scrupulously).) Juan de Ovando: Governing the Spanish Empire in the Reign of Phillip II by Stafford Poole (2004), published by University of Oklahoma Press, page 102: «[About the empire ruled by Philip II] After 1580, with the absortion of Portugal, Philip would rule the entire Iberian Peninsula and the Portuguese empire in Brazil and the Far East». Empires of the Atlantic World: Britain and Spain in America, 1492-1830 by John Huxtable Elliott (2006) published by Yale University Press page xviii: «The confinement of my story to Spanish, rather tan Iberian, America means the almost total exclusion of the Portuguese settlement of Brazil, except for glancing references to the sixty-year period, from 1580-1640, when it formed part of Spain's global monarchy.» ''The Revolutions of Europe: Being an Historical View of the European Nations from the Subversion of the Roman Empire in the West to the Abdication of Napoleon by Christophe Koch, Maximillian Samson Friedrich Schoell, Andrew Crichton (1839). Whittaker and co. page 98: «Charles V of Austria, grandson of Ferdinand, and his sucessor in the Spanish monarchy, added to that crown the Low Countries and Franche-Comté [...]. Charles resigned the Spanish monarchy to his son Philip II which then comprehended the Low Countries the kingdoms of Naples, Sicily and Sardinia, the duchy of Milan, and the Spanish possessions in America. [...] To the states which were left him by his father, 'Philip added the kingdom of Portugal with the Portuguese possessions in Africa Asia and America, but this was the termination of his prosperity». The Epic of Latin America John Armstrong Crow (1980). University of California Press, page 195: «During all these years Portugal and Spain formed a single kingdom (1580-1640). Philip II had made good his claims to the Portuguese throne by force, and the little kingdom did not regain its independence until 1640, when Spanish power was well on the decline. Consequently, the Spanish monarch was also ruler of Brazil, and the mamelucos of Sao Paulo, as well as the Jesuit mission Indians, were his subjects. [...] page 250: For example, in 1640, when Portugal freed herself from the yoke pf Spain, the Paulist decided to declare their own independence of Portugal and choose their own king. page 364: Beginning about 1580, a few single ships under special register or permit were allowed to enter the harbor of Buenos Aires. They could travel directly to Spain and, in certain cases, were allowed to trade with Brazil, then a part of the Spanish Empire». (page 195-196) Enclaves amérindiennes: les "réductions" du Canada, 1637-1701 by Marc Jetten, published by Les éditions du Septentrion (1994) page 20: «En 1580, à l'occasion de l'anexion du Portugal et de ses colonies à l'empire espagnol, le gouvernement de l'ancienne possesion portugaise de Brésil de destitué». (In 1580, during the anexion Portugal and its colonies to the Spanish Empire, the government of the former Portuguese possession of Brazil is removed) Philip IV and the Government of Spain, 1621-1665, written by R. A. Stradling published by Cambridge University Press (2002), p.153: «and around 1580 - Ironically at the time that the Philippine empire achieved optimum size and the Spanish System definitive form, with the annexation of Portugal». In a compilation of writings of the year 1788, we see Conquista del Reyno de Portugal por el mejor derecho que tenía a su corona entre otros pretendientes, por muerte del Rey don Sebastián, el Señor Felipe II, siendo Generalísimo de sus armas el duque de Alva. About the duke of Alba we read in the page 190: «La conquista del reyno de Portugal coronó sus hazañas; parece que la divina Providencia lo había reservado para someter con este reyno quasi todo el Oriente a la Monarquía Española.» The conquest of the kingdom of Portugal crowned his feats; it seems that the divine providence had reserved him to submit with this kingdom (Portugal) almost the whole East to the Spanish Monarchy.) In The Challenge of Hegemony: Grand Strategy, Trade, and Domestic Politics written by Steven E. Lobell, published by University of Michigan Press (2005), page 129 we read «In 1580, Spain acquired Portugal and its extensive empire in Brazil and the East Indies.» And in the page 133 mencions «The Duth used the years of the Spanish-Dutch Truce (1609-21) to consolidate and extend their gains in the East and West Indies at the expense of Spain's Portuguese empire [...]». Depiction: It has been placed dots in the Portuguese empire, since the Portuguese presence was limited to punctual zones during 1580-1640: it has not been included the commercial area but the administrative presence. There are written sources that describe that the Portuguese established in strong points at the coast whereas Brazil appears as coastal zone, [136] General view: [137]:spaced stations along the African coast which the Portuguese had established and enjoyed for a century [138]: By 1600, when the Portuguese Empire (apart from Brazil) remained no more than a string of forts and islands running from West Africa to Macau [...] As we have seen, the Portuguese Empire was wssentially a seaborne a commercial one, growing out of Portugal's traditions of maritime trade and Atlantic seafaring (although in Brazil even the Portuguese were drawn into creating a plantation economy and an expanding land-based empire). [139] A contrast is commonly made between an empire of settlement in the Atlantic - the islands and Brazil - and an empire of trade in the Indian Ocean and the Far East. Indeed the Estado da India has even been represented as being in essence little more than a network of trade routes. So it may be appropiate to recall the exent of Portugal's territorial empire in the East and how the Portuguese envisaged its expansion and development. [140]:The structure of the empire had by the 1550s become extremely complex. There were some fifty fortresses protecting Portuguese trading factories and the larger commercial towns. [141]:The centre of the Portuguese trading empire in the East was India, or more precisely Goa. [...] In contrast with the smaller trading-posts, the colonial domain in Goa extended beyond the harbour region [142]: Goa was a key link in a chain of Portuguese forts and factories extending from Brazil to Japan, including outposts on the Persian Gulf, the Malacca Straits, Indonesia, the East and West Coast of India, and South Africa. [143]: Where no treaties were made or where the Portuguese were given no more than a simple right to trade along with the merchants of ohter nations, it was noy possible for them to entertain any pretensions to exclusive control (senhorio) over trade and navigation, let alone to full sovereignty over territory. Such sovereignty could only be exercised over those lands which had been formally incorporated into the Estado da India, either by conquest or by treaty, and therefore designated as a possessao of the crown. [...] Occasionally, local rulers submitted voluntarily to Portuguese suzerainty , a menas of attaining possessão hat was generally considered to be highly desirable. [144]: with only a small number of trading posts along the coast, it is clear that the Portuguese could not claim sovereignty over the whole 5000 km strech of Guinea from Cape Blanco to the Bight of Biagra. In fact, direct Portuguese influence on the Gold Coast extended little beyond the castle walls, and certainly not beyond the adjoining Afrivcn villages. [145]:The Portuguese elaborated their system on the west with a chain of forts and castles from North Africa to Angola [...] (page 17) The Portuguese penetration of the East African coast was of a different nature from that of the West Coast, as they invaded the existing well-established urban system of the Swahili towns [...] Politically though, the system constituted a group of often mutually hostile city stated with little control beyond their immediate vicinity [146]:The Portuguese established a chain of outposts along India's west coast. [147]: The Portuguese positions in the Lesser Sunda islands, Flores, Solor and Timor were, in reality, isolated communities surrounded by small stated that were vassals, antagonists or so insignificant as to be treated indifferently [148]:and were further distributed to Portuguese enclaves on the west coast of India, to Portuguese forts and factories in East Africa, or to the Persian Gulf. [149]. Tanto en África como luego en Asia, la presencia lusitana se basó en una serie de feitorias, similares a los fondaci establecidos durante la Edad Media por las repúblicas de Venacia y Génova en las costas del Mediterráneo oriental y del mar Negro. Por ello se ha comparado el imperio portugués en el Viejo Mundo a unas línea de diez mil millas de longitud salpicada, a manera de pequeños nudos, de puertos comerciales y fortalezas costeras, en contraste con el extenso y compacto poblamiento castellano en América. [150]: In those places where the Estado da India did not exercise sovereignty and the Portuguese enjoyed only the right to trade granted them by the local ruler the feitoria was generally unfortified. Such were the feitorias in Banda, Makassar, Martaban and Tenasserim. In these places, because there was no territory under Portuguese jurisdiction -not even the small area or praça that in the fortaleza was enclosed by the walls - and so no governmental function for the feitor to perform. [151]:The Lesser Sunda islands was the only area in the Estdo da India outside the Indian sub-continent where the Portuguese had the time and the opportunity to extend their authority beyond the core provided by the feitoria-fortaleza or the municipality to cover a wider territory and embrace larger populations, made up of Christians and non-Christians alike. It was the only area where they could have attemted at an early date to dreate a form of colonial administration that would not only have safeguarded their commercial interests and protected their Christian missions but might also have achieved for them a measure of control over the territories that produced the goods in which they traded. [...] Even in the Lesser Sunda islands, however, the establishment of Portuguese administration beyond the walls of the fortalezas wich the Dominicans and later the Portuguese military authorities set up successively in Solor, Flores and Timor was never seriously or sistematically undertaken. [152]: It is also interesting to note that Portugal's tenure on the Gold coast was in no respect colonialism as we think of it today. The Portuguese had no jurisdiction beyond theit forts, which were built with the permission of the local chiefs on land that was formally leased for the purpose. [153] Outside the city-state of Goa, the empire was geographically fragmentes. Although called a 'state', the Estado da India existed largely without population or territory, in some respects almost a metaphisical state, consisting of abstract rights and claims [...]. However this metaphisical state had some outlying centres of real authority. There were the fortresses established to uphold and protect the commercial monopolies of the Crown. Overview [154] Brazil [155] E incluso, en 1621 se formó un Estado do Maranhão formado por las recién establecidas capitanías de la corona de Ceará, Maranhão y Pará y cierto número de pequeñas capitanías privadas con su propio gobernador general que residía en São Luís do Maranhão. [156] De hecho, desde los años 1620, desde el punto de vista administrativo, la región norte constituía un Estado separado de Brasil; era el Estado do Maranhão e Pará. [157] As his crew passed the territory of the Tapajós, they encountered the son of the governor of Pará, named Bento Maciel like his father , and found him no more troubled by brutal exploitation of the native population than his father had been [158] In 1616 the Portuguese moved permanently into the Amazon region, founding Belem and establishing a separate governorship of Maranhao e Para. This was follewed shortly afterwards by the expulsion of English and Dutch traders from the Amazon stuary. [159] History of the basin in the early seventeenth century was charactized by yhe continual attemps by the Portuguese to control the estuary of the river. The first Portuguese settlements were fortresses, as the Lusitanians sought to secure the basin for Portugal and drive the English, French, and Dutch from the area. The forts at Belem (1616) and Gurupá (1623) were the first, being the most needed to protect areas of greatest traffic from the Atlantic approach to the basin. [160] Sao Luís, Belém y la fortaleza de Santo Antonio de Gurupá (sobre el Amazonas), se transformaron en los principales centros para el dominio portugués de la región. [161] The Portuguese had little interest in the portion of South America alloted to them in the Treaty of Tordesillas, [...] But as war spread across Europe, Spain wanted to ensure protection of her overseas territories and, forging Iberian alliance, Spain encouraged Portugal to remove foreigners from her part of South America. Fort Pésepio was built in 1616, in the location where Bélem now stands, and by the early 1630s, the Portuguese had the eastern half of Amazonia to themselves. [162] In the north a key event in this expansionary process was the final driving away of the French in 1615. Immediately after this a Portuguese expedicionay force was sent to found a settlement on the Amazon. On the Pará River actually the southern arm of the Amazon estuary, this was done. A fortress was built, the nucleus of what soon became the town of Bélem. [...] From this new northern base area, exploration of the Amaon now proceed, driven in large part by slaving of Indians along the river's banks. Native communities around the shores of the enormous estuary were all but destroyed. [163]: At the root of the problem lay the wealth of Peru. So preocupied was Spain with the fabulous riches of this viceroyalty that little effort was made to extend its jurisdiction up to the line of Tordesillas. [...] The fort of São Luís which they [the French] had constructed was taken by Captain Francisco Caldeira de Castelo Branco, who headed the captaincy of Rio Grande do Norte, in 1615; the success of this campaign led the military leaders in a meeting on December 13 to plan an advance on the Amazon [...] The force got under way on Christmas day, 1615, and anchored in Guajará Bay on January 12, 1616, where they built a fort called Presépio. [164] O que se afirma com convicção é que a ocupação definitiva da Amazônia se inicia com a chegada da esquadra de Francisco Cladeira Castelo Branco à Baía Guajara em 12 de janeiro de 1616. Castelo Branco saíra do Maranhão sob a determinação do governador Bento Maciel Parente com o objetivo de tomar parte posse da região em nome da Coroa Portuguesa e expandir sua dominação através da exploração da nova área [...] A edificação do Forte do Presépio por Castelo Branco simbolizou o domínio militar dos lusitanos no Pará. Entratanto, era necessário ocupar definitivamente as novas terras, intensificando os trabalhos de colonização. Como a mão-de-obra era bastante escassa na Região Norte, a solução imediata era o resgate o aprisionamento dos grupos indígenas. [...] [165] A passagem da expedição de Pedro Teixeira pela região do Tapajós simbolizou também o marco inicial do processo histórico oficial de Santarém e de suas adjacências, que passaram a ser incorporadas como novas áreas de domínio colonial português na Amazônia [166] La parte noroeste de la Amazonia fue explorada a fines del siglo XVII. En la última década del mismo se estableció un pequeño fuerte cerca de Manaus. [167] Entre 1532 y 1650 se establecieron en Brasil 6 ciudades y 31 pueblos o vilas. Las primeras colonizaciones se concentraron a lo largo de la costa, entre Olinda y Santos, pero a partir de 1580, con la ampliación a l largo de la colonia hacia el norte, hubo una nueva ola de colonizaciones, fundándose Natal (1599), Sa Luís (1615) y Belém (1616). Una vez más todas estas ciudades eran puertos, y no fue hasta la segunda parte del siglo XVIII, con la apertura de Minas Gerais, que la red urbana empezó a ampliarse hacia el interior De hecho, se podría defender la interpretación de que en Brasil no existió una red de ciudades estrechamente conectadas, sino más bien un arcipiélago de puertos, cada uno rodeado por una zona agrícola propia, y más vinculadas con Lisboa que entre ellas mismas. [168] The first line of Portuguese expansion was trhough Paraíba and Rio Grande do Norte into Ceará, where Fortaleza was established by a royal expedition in 1610. The second was in response to a French incursion in Maranhao which finally repulsed in 1616. The third and perhaps most important was the advance into Pará, where the Portuguese established a fort in 1616. This fort, at present-day Bélem, would be a key factor in the expansion of Portugal into the Amazon, because no other European power made an all-out effort to control thid important waterway. [169] The Poruguese then began establishing frontiers outposts along the Amazon, including Santarém in 1640 and Manaus in 1660. North east of Africa: Ceuta, Tangier, Arzila, Mazagan: [170] Arguin: [171] Cacheu: [172] Forts of Axim, Shama, Elmina: [173], [174] [175] [176] [177] Fernado Poo, Principe, Annobon, Sao Tome: [178] Summary: [179] Angola: Luanda, Benguela: [180] [181] [182] [183] [184] Fihgting broke out in 1579 and for ten years, until his death in 1589, Paulo Dias was at war. In ten years of fighting he succeeded in establishing forts along the Cuanza river valley but made no further progress towards the interior. Moreover the fighting destroyed any hopes of large-scale settlement [185] Colonization had proceeded slowly, and was limited to Luanda and its environs, and Benguela. [186] The creation of the city of Luanda was accompanied by the rection of several garrison along the Kwanza River as in the captaincy of Benguela, a region located on the coast to the south. The Portuguese military advance into the Kwanza region aimed at confronting the king of Ndongo and entailed the construction of fortified outposts in conquered territories. Following the Portuguese victories, garrisons were established on the north side of the Kwanza River at Massangano (1583), Cambambe (1602), Ambaca (1614), Dondo (1652), Cassanje (1625), Golungo (1658), and Pungo-Andongo (1671). On the south side of the river, fortifications were constructed at Muxima (1589), Benguela Velha (1587), Benguela (1617), and Caconda a Velha (1680). The result of this advance was the creation of a discontinous territorial space centered on garrisons and markets, organized along a network of land routes which ran along the same paths as the internal slave trade and upon which circulated Africans, traders, and doldiers in permanent movement to and frm Luanda. :The colony of Angola was a veritable 'network state' in the sense that the term has been used by Luís Filipe Thomaz to explain the political and administrative structure of the Estado da India. This territory was, at its core, 'a network and not a space'. The Estado da India was a set of discrete territories, a complex network of commecial routed spread across the Indian Ocean held together by political and legal relationships. Fortresses stood adjacent to feitorias and cities where the Portuguese state eercised true sovereignty and enjoyed relations with the various Asian states, either as overlords or equals. This tate of affairs in the Indian Ocean basin was closely approxmated in Angola. Here and there, territorial discontinuity was complemented by institutional, legal and jurisdictional plurality. Jean-Luc Vellut suggested as much when he claimed that the Portuguese presence in Angola created a Luso-African network that came to coexist alongside and interact with pre-existing African nerworks. Mozambique: Sofala, Quelimane, Sena, Tete: [187] ; [188] (pages 136-146) Sena, Tete: [189] [190] The Portuguese control of the territory of what is today Mozambique was anything but effective, [...] Their control was fragile and mainly confined to forts and trading posts along the coast of the Indian Ocean and the Zambezi River, which was their main route to the interior. This lack of effectiveness was due to two factors. First, the Portuguese did not establish an efficient local administration. [...] The second reason was Portugal's decision to grant land concessions (prazos) to her subjects. [191] From the arrival of the Portuguese navigator Vasco da Gama in 1498 till the late nineteenth century, the Portuguese presence was mainly limited to forts and trading posts along the coast or by the Zambezi river. The Portuguese took over Muslim trading posts established in thje fifteenth century at Sena and Tete to deal with the gold-producing kingdom of the Monotapa, centred on what is now Zimbabwe, and also installed themselves at Sofala. Settlement of the Zambezi area proceeded during the seventeenth cenury through a system of granting land concessions (prazos) to Portuguese subjects, who ran them as feudal landlords under the Portuguese Crown. [192]In the sixteenth century the shores of the bay immediately opposite the island became extentions of the island city. Many of the Muslim population moved to the southern shores around Sancul, while the Portuguse settled the Cabaceira peninsula to the north. [193] A number of disastrous military forays into the interior are recorded and their lack of success certainly discouraged the Portuguse from trying too open to go beyond their Cabaceira settlements. [...] By the end of the sixteenth century they controlled the Zambesi valley as far as Chicoa and had settlements in all the major mining and gold trading. [194]: Sofala which continued to be located in the small isolated fortress 5000 miles to the south [195] The Portuguese presence in south-east Africa dated from the early 16th century, with main fortalezas established oh that coast at Mozambique island (1507) and Sofala (1505). In addition, the Crown maintained minor coastal posts at Quelimane (at the mouth of the Zambezi) and Luabo island; along with the interior settlements upriver at Sena an Tete [196] Prazos came into existence when a number of Portuguese or Goanese colinists assumed the status of political chiefs over land that initially belonged to the indigenous African peoples. The process began around Sena at the close of the sixteenth century and gradually spread to other parts of the lower Zambezi valley in the seventeenth. [...] In the eighteenth century, prazos dominated the whole lower Zambezi region from the Luabo or Zambezi delta in the east to Chicoa in the west. [197] (Inhambane) The beginnings of a permanent Portuguese settlement dates from 1727. Map [198] [199] In the 1630s the main Manica fair was at Chipangura, later called Masekesa, where a large Portuguese and Christian community numbering twenty-five heads of households maintained a mud-walled fort. [...] However, the fairs of Manica never decame centres for formal Portuguese political power. Manica was not divides into prazos and the fairs continued to be commercial centres only. [...] Towards the end of the sixteenth century there appear to haver been three major gold fairs, Masapa, Bocuto and Luanze. Masapa was close to the capital of the Monomotapa near Mount Darwin and clearly under his directo control. The commercial community at Masapa was ruled by a Portuguese captain [...] The captain of Masapa's authority extended to the two neighbouring fairs. [200] In the sixteenth century there were three river ports (Quelimane, Sena and Tete) and three principal inland fairs with a portuguese population. Each of the fairs had a captain, that of Masapa being recognised as the senior. [...] By the turn of the century the Rivers settlements were divided into six jurisdictions, Sofala, Quelimane, Sena, Tete, Manica and Mokaranga [The Portuguese called the region that came directly under the Monomotapa's rule Mokaranga [201]] [...] [202] In 1634 the captaincy of Sena stretched from the mouth of the Zambesi to the river Ruenha [sic. (Luenha)] [...] Subordinate to Sena were the settlements in Manica. There is no mention of a Portuguese captain there before the eighteenth century but in the 1630s there were three settlements, two of which, Chipangura (Masekesa) and Mutuca, had earth forts. [...] The Tete captaincy ran from the Ruenha to a pint about 10 leagues up river of Tete [...] In 1634 there were six Portuguese forts in the interior of Mokaranga: Majova (on the Mazoe but still in Tonga country), Luanze, Matafuna, Dambarare, Masapa and Chipiriviri. Each had a captain chosen by the captain of Mozambique from among the settlers and traders. West of Africa: Sofala, Zanzibar, Sena, Quelimane, Tete, Mozambique, Mombasa: [203] Zanzibar, Pate island, Mombasa, Malindi: [204] Mombassa, Pemba, Zanzibar, Pate: [205] Sofala, Pate, Lamu, Pemba, Mombasa, Malindi, Mozambique: [206] Pemba, Malindi, Lamu, Pate, Zanzibar: [207] Summary: [208] Persian Gulf: Julfar, Hormuz, Muscat, Sohar, Khor Fakkan (Corfaçao): [209] Queixome, Julfar, Ormuz, Mascate: [210] Queixome, Julfar, Doba, Ormuz: [211] Muscat, Sohar, Kor Fakkan: [212] Máskat, Hormuz, Gambrun (Comorão): [213] Ormuz, Muscat, Bahrein, Gombrun (Comorão): [214] Coriate (Quryat), Calaiate (Qalhat): [215] India: Summary of Portuguese India and Western Indian Ocean (Bassein, Daman, Diu, Chaul, Goa, Sena, Tete, Quelimane): [216] Diu, Damao, Mangalore, Cannanore, Cranganur, Cochin, Coulao (Quilon), Negapatam, Sao Tome (Mylapore): [217] Goa, Damão, Baçaim, Diu, Chaul: [218] Daman, Diu, Chaul, Baçaim, Mumbai (Bombay): [219] Goa: [220] Cochin, Quilon, Cranganur: [221], Mylapore: [222] Kodungallor (Cranganore), Kochi (Cochin): [223] Goa, Chaul, Bassein: [224] Bombay, Chaul, Bassein: [225] Onavar, Basrur: [226] Honawar, Barsur, Mangalore: [227] Colombo, Jaffna, Nagapattinam (Negapatam), Tuticorin, Cochin, Kollam (Quilon), Cannanore, Honawar,Basrur, Mangalore: [228] Tuticorin: [229] Daman, Diu, Meliapor, Hugli, Chittagong, Macau: [230] Ceylon: [231], [232], [233], [234], [235], [236] Southeast Asia: Syriam: [237][238] Macau: [239] Malacca: [240][241] Lesser Sunda islands (with Castilian outposts): Summary of Lesser Sunda islands: [242][243] Maps: [244][245] Solor, Flores, Larantuka, Ende: [246]. Flores, Solor, Adonara: [247] Solor: [248] Ambon, Flores, Timor: [249] Solor, Flores, Ende, Larantuka, Timor: [250] Larantuka, Solor, Flores, Adonara: [251] Solor, Timor, Flores, Larantuka: [252] Solor, Ende: [253] Ambon, Spanish Tidore-Ternate: [254] Spanish Halmahera, Ternate, Tidore: [255] Spanish Tidore, Ternate, Gilolo, Sabougo, Moro: [256] Spanish Maluku: [257] Ternate, Tidore: [258] Flores, Timor, Larantuka: [259] Flores, Timor, Larantuka, Solor: [260] Flores, Solor, Timor: [261] Timor (Lifau): [262][263][264][265][266] Makassar only a trading post: [267]

Malvinas

How possible could be a spanish map without the spanish name for the Falklands ? I will suggest use the United Nations convention Falklands (Malvinas) --Jor70 (talk) 23:22, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

This map is not a Spanish map but a map of History of Spain written in English language, I have tried to use the terms as appear in sources in English language, as Canary islands, Minorca, Sardinia, Sicily, Ceylon... tha Falklands appear named in maps in 17th century (File:Hawkesworth-Byron-Map.PNG), and United Nations are neither a historical nor linguistical institution. Trasamundo (talk) 17:37, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Macau

Should Macau be included in this map, as it was never under the Spanish king's administration? Thanks.--Uxbona (talk) 22:51, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

Macau is represented together with the rest of the Portuguese empire because the sources reveal it. The question was complex because it was not a Spanish administration on the one hand and Portuguese on the other hand. The sources establish that there were territorial particular administrations: Castile, the kingdoms of the Crown of Aragon, Portugal, Netherlands, Burgundy, Milan... and bringing them together, there was a polisynodial administration of the whole Spanish Monarchy. The sources are indicated in the paragraph: Why is depicted the Portuguese empire?

On the other hand Macau was not a simple commercial port, the Portuguese were exercising administration there since 1557. [268] Trasamundo (talk) 14:59, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Islas del Pacífico

Tras la Guerra Cubana o Hispano-Estadounidense de 1898, el tratado de paz obligó a ceder la isla de Guam y las islas Marianas del Norte a EE.UU. Es decir, ambos territorios pertenecían a España hasta esa fecha (deberían aparecer en el mapa en naranja). Ambas estuvieron vinculadas a la Monarquía Hispánica desde la vuelta al mundo de Magallanes y Elcano, expedición sufragada por Carlos I, y que arribó a esas islas del Pacífico en 1521. Sin embargo, hasta el reinado de Felipe II no pasaron a ser oficialmente territorios de soberanía española (dentro del Virreinato de la Nueva España). Saludos de un historiador — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.76.209.33 (talk • contribs) 12:44, 31 ene 2011 (UTC)

In fact, these islands appear in orange above and below the text «Spanish East Indies», however, they are small islands and they are not recognized well without zoom. Trasamundo (talk) 18:09, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Louisiana included but not Patagonia or German territories

Hi there, I respect the way you justify the choices you've taken, but is quite amusing that in the XVIII century Castile exerted more control over Patagonia than over Louisiana but the latter is included in the map. In both cases, it can be argued that they were possessions nominally but the empire failed to stablish any successful city in any of those two places. In the other hand I wonder why German territories of the Habsburg, under the rule of Charles V, are not included. Anyway, thanks for your work. Superfloccinaucinihilipilification (talk) 17:06, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

The sources are above. When the emperor Maximilian died in 1519, the Austrian territories were inherited by his grandsons Charles and Ferdinand, and in 1521, emperor Charles V renounced to them. These territories never belonged to the Spanish Crown, only briefly to a sovereign that at that moment was King of Spain also. Trasamundo (talk) 20:38, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

Hispanic American Wars of Independence

Should this reference be the Spanish American Wars of Independence? Does any historian use the term "Hispanic American Wars?" en:Spanish_American_wars_of_independence -- 07:42, 9 April 2016‎ Jcalton