Talk:History of Filipinas
The Article says:
- 1542-1546: The Villalobos Expedition, sailing from Nueva Castilla (Mejico), stumbles upon the Caroline Islands, Yap, and Palao. With the expedition is the famous Jesuit, Francisco Javiér. The Jesuits are the first European missionaries in Filipinas. Then the expedition proceeds west and touches at the island of Magindanao, which Villalobos names "La Isla Felipina" in honour of Prince Felipe of Castilla-León. (The name would later be applied to the entire archipelago as "Las Islas Filipinas" by Legazpi, who would be sent out by the former prince by then ruling as Felipe II). The expedition continues to sail around the southern side of the island of Maguindanao and into the Vizayas. Once out of Surigao Strait, the expedition is carried by strong winds back to the Moluccas.
- 1556: Philip II of Castille, in a letter to Luis de Velasco, viceroy of Nueva Castilla (Mejico), approves plans to annex the Islas Poniente (as the Castillians called Filipinas at the time).
I guess it was previusly discussed, that Philip, son of Emperor Charles V, was not king of Castile and Leon, but king of Aragon (and Navarre, Valencia, incoprporated into Aragon, plus Naples, Sicily and the Netherlands). He became king Philip I of Aragon.
So, the islands would not have been named after Castillian prince/king Philip. I guess the discution had said that alternatives might have included St Philip.
--Chlewey 07:27, 13 Feb 2005 (PST)
- Thanks! I knew that this was one of the things I had to fix, but I had no clue how. I'll settle for the solution that says that the Islas Poniente were named after San Felipe. But why San Felipe?
- Here's a possible solution: Perhaps, instead of a Francisco Javier, there was a Felipe Javier, who was declared a saint after his death. Since this Jesuit would have had such an enormous influence in the Far East, perhaps the islands were named after him. Until such time, the islands would have been called by its original name of "Las Islas Poniente".
- Boreanesia 08:52, 13 Feb 2005 (PST)
Colonial conflicts in 18th century
The events of 1762-1763 need to be considered in relation to the colonial conflict happening on the Atlantic seaboard at the same time. andrew.
France, Spain and England/Scotland are involved with a series of colonial wars, a second theatre to the wars going on in Europe (Spanish Succession; Austrian Succession; Seven Years War). French in New Francy and Louisianna; Spanish in Florida; English/Scots (and friendly powers) in New England and Atlantic colonies. As a result of conflict Alba Nuadh becomes a Scottish possession and City of Quebec is captured after a siege. English active in the West Indies. French and Spanish suing for peace even before reports of Manila reach Europe.
Not sure hether all these details are moot in Ill Bethisad. - andrew.
- I guess this is a paralel to the seven years war *here*. Of course, there were so many colonial conflicts in the 16th to 19th centuries *here* that I guess they are paralleled *there*. But in Ill Bethisad there was no Spanish Succession War, as there was no Spain. There was an Aragonese Succession War, in which Castile was involved, but then, when the Burbons took control of Aragon, the Castilians would don't have an excuse to ally with the French against the English/British during a *Seven Years War. -Chlewey 07:44, 13 Feb 2005 (PST)
- I suppose then that the British invasion of Manila never took place in IB. There's no problem with that as far as the timeline is concerned. The Diego Siláñg and Gabriela Siláñg Revolts could have had another stimulus. Perhaps it was the Borneians that invaded and (re)conquered Manila in 1762. Boreanesia 08:52, 13 Feb 2005 (PST)
- In regard to the 7 years war, from what had been mentioned on the conculture list there was nothing ressembling it *there* (at least from their french, spanish and uk counterparts point of view). What later became the Alba nuadh province was originaly settled, without any royal charter, by french huguenots who were later displaced by the scots (the former being "heretics" and in a sense, squaters, they received no direct help from france or new-francy but were allowed "temporary" residence in the bayou of Louisiana). I think it was pretty much a dull 7 years in north-america (baring the odd native raid)--Marc Pasquin 06:38, 16 Feb 2005 (PST)
When I outlined 19th/20th century history of Castile and Leon, I had proposed that the Philipines would not have been lost in the 1898 event, as, unlike OTL, there was not USA presure to end Spanish colonialism.
So I gave a later date (1925?). Of course, this is not fast. One posibility might be that in 1898, the Philipines declared her independence, but this is not recognized by the Castilian government, who still is unable to control (i.e. project force against) the rebellion. From 1898 to 1926, the Philipines is considered a rebel province.
In 1926, the new Republican Government in Europe, and the restored monarchy in Castilian Overseas Nations, recognized the de facto independence of the Philipines.
I will have to rewrite this a little.
--Chlewey 07:37, 13 Feb 2005 (PST)
- I agree! It makes total sense! I'll rewrite the History of Filipinas page to reflect your suggestion. Boreanesia 08:52, 13 Feb 2005 (PST)
- That might also explain why Palau and Marianas became connected with the Micronesian Confederation. Maybe during this period, they too broke away from both Castile and Filipinas. Particularly the Marianas, being very near Japan, might've become closer to Japan and Micronesia Nik 13:51, 16 Feb 2005 (PST)
- I don't think so. Geographically, Palao and the Marianas are Micronesian. But the the Chamorro culture (from Marianas) is more Filipino than it is Micronesian, while the Palaoan culture is more Yapese and Malucan. As far as which of the two would have broken away from both Castile and Filipinas, I think Palao would have been the best candidate, and it would have become much closer to the Malucos or Yap then it would with Japan or the rest of Micronesia. Boreanesia 22:44, 17 Feb 2005 (PST)
When did Castile give up its claim to the Caroline Islands? They became a Japanese protectorate in 1872, according to the Micronesian Confederation article. Did Castile still claim them at that time?
I suggest adding these two dates, taken from the Micronesia article:
1872: The Caroline Islands become a Japanese protectorate.
1956: The Micronesian Confederation is formally released from control of the Japanese coccai, with Emperor Saisei remaining as High King. Henceforth, Bornei-Filipinas pays tribute to the Confederation rather than to Japan for Palau and the Marianas.
Benkarnell 10:34, 2 January 2008 (PST)
I like these ideas. Detailed more recent history from the Filipinas was missing. Did the DR Bornei become a member of LoN? Or did it just get recognition from the Communist world?
You wrote "Ironically for a SNORist state, he instituted left-wing principles like expropriating the land from the "undeserving rich" [those aristocrats and Principalia who opposed Marcos] to the poor, and this approach was later adopted in other SNORist states so that their regime get popular support". Perhaps is not that ironic. Sometimes right wing regimes take so-called left wing measures. I don't see Snorism 100% capitalist, I see it as somekind of third economic way, not exactly capitalist but also surely not communist. Maybe something half way.--Pedromoderno 22:21, 13 July 2010 (UTC)
The DR Bornei decided to wait the CSDS's advice. It eventually decided against doing so for a while. In any case, it never did.
--Chinofilipino 16:21, 15 July 2010 (UTC)
- Any ideas for flags from Snorist Filipinas and DR Bornei?--Pedromoderno 00:33, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
I'm still brainstorming about Filipinas though.
And could I ask if I could separate Bornei from Filipinas? Because I am planning to make Bornei a permanently Communist state, and the last Asian communist state. I am planning to cut Sabah into halves, a Filipinas one in the Coast and the rest being Communist Bornei. Can I talk to the Lla Dafern if I am allowed to do this... --Chinofilipino 06:29, 27 July 2010 (UTC)
- I don't have a problem with that, but SE Asia isn't really my playground. But fwiw, I think it sounds like a good idea. Geoff 13:48, 28 July 2010 (UTC)