Talk:Evolution of the Portuguese Empire

Map

I find this map very misleading, as maps of these types often are. The authors tend to get a bit overexcited about things. The pink areas particularly are rather dubious - eg the eastern coast of Australia. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick 22:43, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

I made the anachronous map of the Portuguese Empire, and am willing to discuss all the details you may desire. Notice that eastern coast of Australia (see Theory of Portuguese discovery of Australia), as the territories in North America, are accompanied by question marks, clearly staing their dubious nature. I didn't "get a bit overexcited about things" - notice that, contrary to many "map makers", I didn't just coloured red all of India or Indonesia, but rather pointed directly to actual possessions, mainly cities and fortresses, marked red in precise locations (as precise as the scale permits). But do feel free to comment. I'm happly to reply to all I can. Thanks. The Ogre 15:10, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

I think that the pink and blue areas are not necessary. Instead, showing the exploration routes of the "famous" explorers would be better, alongside the colonies where Portugal really had sovereignty beyond a short stop or an indefensible claim. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick 15:30, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Discussed moved to Talk:Portuguese Empire. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick 15:50, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

Banda Islands

Merbabu deleted the Banda Islands from the list, saying that "banda was never a portuguese possession. The portuguese were merely customers." I reverted him saying "Merbabu, that may be so, and I don't necessarily disagree with you, but could you provide some sources in the talk page and then del the link? Thanks!" And now I wait. The Ogre 12:59, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Firstly the fact is, wikipedia policy stipulates that the onus providing references is not on those that question unreferenced material, but those that want to keep it. see (Wikipedia:Verifiability#Burden_of_evidence). In theory, the whole article thus could be deleted But that is not my game, I just want to point out the nature of Portuguese involvement in the Bandas. My sources? Please read here, scroll down to the portuguese sub section. There is more that could go in there and more refs. I suggest the map will need changing to. And now I wait. ;) he he. kind regards --Merbabu 13:13, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello Merbabu! Thanks for your reply. I was going to revert too to your version (I went and read the article on the Banda Islands and saw the references), but had to leave in a hurry. Thank you for you compliment on the map - I did loose some time with it! It is still a work in progress, though. I see that you are a member of WikiProject Indonesia, maybe you could help with more precise locations for the Portuguese presence in the area - actual possessions and for how long, areas of explorations, influence and commerce/trade. Exact locations are not easy to came by! As for the reason for the split into two articles, it was done by an user called The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick. You can check all the relevant discussions (and participate!) in Talk:Portuguese Empire#An exploration = Empire? and Talk:Portuguese Empire#Anachronous map of the Portuguese Empire (1415-1999). Please do! Cheers! The Ogre 14:58, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Corrected the map concerning the color (red to pink) for the Banda Islands. The Ogre 15:22, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Indonesia

I do believe that the present version of the map does portray correctly the Portuguese presence in the whole of Indonesia - notice that in red are only marked the islands of Timor, Flores, Ambon, Ternate and Tidore. The pink areas are those of explorations, influence and commerce/trade. The Ogre 15:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Sounds correct. There was also Solor but it probably gets included as part of Flores. Merbabu 21:38, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Maps of this period

I suggest to put some maps of this period along the sections of the article. For example, in the section of South America we could put some maps of Brazil in the XVI century, and for other regions the same. What do you think?Câmara 02:05, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Sure! Do you have them? The Ogre 13:34, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Wiki have this Image:Brazil-16-map.jpg for Brazil, and I have also Vaz Dourado map. For Africa I have Cantino and Vaz Dourado maps, but Waldseemuller could be used too. For North America the maps I displayed in the Portuguese Empire discussion page, maybe Reinel-Lopo Homem as it looks better. For India/Persia and Southeast Asia/Oceania I have Vaz Dourado again... but also one map of Ortelius that covers India and Indonesia. For these zones Cantino and Waldsemuller does not seem great...(India being an island, chaotic Indonesia, etc). I will update them to this discussion page later. As they are historical maps, it does not seem to have any problem.Câmara 22:11, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

We could also show a mapa mundi of the Portuguese Empire, especially from the mid-late XVI century, as in the beginning East Asia was not good in maps... I like Lopo Homem 1554 as it is one of the few maps to show the line of Tordesillas and its anti-meridian (or maybe the line of Saragoza, I don't know).Câmara 22:18, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Let's see what I've got:

South America (Vaz Dourado c.1576):

Africa (Cantino 1502):

Asia & Oceania (Anonymous c.1550):File:Asia oceania anonymous c1550.JPG

North America & North Atlantic:

What do you think?Câmara 21:36, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Map of the Spanish Empire

Hello everyone. Please come to Talk:Spanish Empire#Map and participate in the discussion. It pertains to the inclusion of the Portuguese Empire in the territories of the Spanish Empire during the period of the Iberian Union from 1580 to 1640. Thank you! The Ogre 13:07, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Portuguese Map of Australia From 1522

Hi. I don't know Wikipedia's rules for editing a discussion, buy I just wanted to point out some information about this issue: http://studioz.multiply.com/journal/item/862/862 http://noticias.terra.com.br/ciencia/interna/0,,OI1497806-EI295,00.html These are written in portuguese, but there are probably english language sites about it. This theory is a bit old news, and I know these sites aren't exactly a source, but the book probably is. If someone would be interested in adding this information to the article, I don't quite know if I'm allowed to, or even how to do it. Cheers! 12:52, 15 Jan 2011 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.168.85.15 (talk)

Rename title to History of...

Evolution should be associated with biological aspects. Dpleibovitz (talk) 21:18, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

This article and its fancy map are delirious trash

Showing the whole of Canada as having been part of the Portuguese Empire because, for generations, Portuguese fishermen fished on and off the shores of Newfoundland, the whole of China because Portugal possessed microscopic Macau. Plus Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Iran, Irak, Japan, Peru, etc. etc, etc, etc. etc. as part of said Portuguese Empire...
What delirious trash. --Lubiesque (talk) 21:28, 29 December 2018 (UTC)