The Spanish Seaborne Empire J H Parry / World Without End The Global Empire of Philip II Hugh Thomas/Rivers of Gold: The Rise of the Spanish Empire. Hugh Thomas / The Spanish Treasure Fleets Timothy R Walton / The Spanish Caribbean and the Atlantic World in the Long Sixteenth Century Ida Altman, David Wheat / War in the West Indies The Anglo-Spanish War 1655-1660 Paul Sutton / No Settlement, No Conquest A History of the Coronado Entrada Richard Flint /THE WORLD OF THE MANILA-ACAPULCO GALLEONS by EDGARDO J. ANGARA (Author), CARLOS MADRID PHD (Author) / The Conquest of New Spain Bernal Diaz Del Castillo
You should contact spanish historians, like Carlos Canales, or the colombian Pablo Victoria, the argentinian Julio Gonzalez and many others, english has missleaded spanish history, you can find the truth of spanish history if you read spanish sources.
Side note: the first global currency was the Spanish Dollar also called piece of eight, it was legal tender in the far East, Europe and the Americas. In fact many modern currencies are based in the Spanish Dollar (Yuan, USD, Pesos from the Americas)
@@xavierrealmadrid7420 as a portuguese myself, I agree, but don’t forget the Dutch and Spanish were mostly responsible for the fall of the Portuguese Empire more the Dutch than the Spanish though but still.
Finally someone who explains the history of the Spanish Empire without the hatred all other European countries have against. I have really enjoyed the whole series, Bravo for your great effort!
This has too much information. I just like to say maybe don't cram the information and focused on more slowly but understandable becuase this is way too much to take in. Just an advice i really fell in love with this channel with the italian wars and I think you could be one of the best.
It is not "Casa de Contraction" is "Casa de Contratación". 1640 rebellions include Aragon and Andalucia as well. in 1647 there was a heavy rebellion as well in Naples. Utrecht treaty of 1713 separates Naples, Milan and Flanders from Spain. In 1763 the British did not take Florida, it was exchanged for La Habana. After the USA's war of independence, Spain gave back Louisiana to France to gain back Florida. The independence of the Colonies is not as you exposed. Actually 1812's constitution allows representation for the colonies...however nor the king nor the independents want this. They want respectively absolute monarchy and independence. This could be seen clearly in 1820 after the Riego's coup d'etat: he was hated from both the independents and the royalist. Santo Domingo was not "colonized again" they freely decided to return to Spain in 1863 and freely decided to when independent once more in 1865. Equatorial Guinea had more hospital beds per people than the mainland Spain. It's just not true that Spain didn't invest in the colonies. BTW Ifni and Moroccan Spain were as well colonies.
@@enriquepascual8767 he also said something like God want us to make peace for he has deprived us of the means to do war, rollescoaster years for Spain then.
I am so thankful to have found this channel! You are awesome and make incredible quality content. If there is anyway I can support you please let me know and I look forward to seeing more.
In reality Spain controlled the five continents. -Europe (1520-1700, but the conquests begin in 1282 and end in 1759: Italy) -America (1492-1825, but presence in the Caribbean until 1898) -Oceanía (called Spanish lake) (1521-1825, but presence until 1898. -Asia: annexation of the Portuguese empire, ruled from Madrid (1580-1640) but the Spanish presence before (1521-1898) -Africa: annexation of the Portuguese empire (1580-1640), but presence from 1404-1975. And Antarctica: sighting in 1603. First world arrival: 1819, San Telmo ship.
The only thing I want to point out is that Spain invested a lot in the spanish America, from all gold and silver extracted, 80% remained in America to build everything, Universities, schoolls, hospitals.....everything, only 20% was sent to Spain, the so called Royal fith (quinto real), and Spain had to spent a lot of money because the continuos wars, in fact the main income for the spanish Crown in Europe was through taxes, mostly upon Castilians. The spanish America and their inhabitants were the richest in the world, best cities in the world, higher wages in the world, people best fed in the world, everything, those peoples lived in luxory and peace, in the 18th century the spanish America was the heven on earth, is difficoult to believe if we look at them now, and also because is not told in books and Academy, history worldwide is told by the english sources, even in Spain most of the people does not know the truth, but some historians and economists in Spain, Colombia, Argentina, Mexico... since few decades ago are starting to search and investigate all files and records, magazines from those times...everything, and starting to reveal the truth. The spanish America was the richest civilization on earth, far more rich than any european country, I think is difficoult you will find this info in english, maybe you can't find something from the german schoolar and polimate Alexander von Humbodt that in the 18th century travelled the spanish America and wrote about this issue, in spanish you have the works of the mexican Esquivel Obregon, the colombian Pablo Victoria, the argentinian Julio Gonzalez, and some other spanish or hispanics as Patricio Lons, Carlos Canales......, if one day I have time, I will try to find any of their works translated or published into english and I will post it here, but I am afraid is not the case, the real history of Spain is even“forbidden” in Spain, and is not taught in the education system, what is worst the black legend is taught in Spain is going to take decades that this change, and maybe won't ever be, and only a very little minority will know.
It also invested quite a lot in Guinea Ecuatorial, though not as much since it did consider Guinea Ecuatorial a colony (the American territories were not considered colonies, at least not how we understand colonies now a days). I don't know where this myth of Spain not investing in its territories comes from, when Spain is probably the Empire that invested the most in its territories. Well, I do know where it comes from, precisely from those who ddin't bother to invest too much on their territories... They got to pretend they did something.
Good high level overview, objective and not contaminated by ideology like so many books and lectures we see today. The Spanish empire was an interesting model of mixed races and mixed cultures. There was an intense cultural exchange and local ethnic groups were respected by law as any other subject of the crown. The trade with China is fascinating as it opened 300 years before the brits did it and the Spanish paid in silver not in opium. This created a financial and fiscal revolution in China and when this trade stoped it triggered China’s period of decadence that was accelerated by the opium wars. I guess all empires are questionable (although inevitable) but some are more questionable than others....
what is the interesting in spreading death and devastation, that is very simple, the spanish demods were able to ocuppate the america terrotoriest thanks to the epidemist that they intencionality spread, the 85% of the population died, in america there were already great civiliation with ancestral knowlodges able to change the world, but that savages the only thing did wih that wisdom, burnet it, a madnesses so stupid the humanity lossed centuries of advantages. no me dear the spanish empire was not interesting but a shame for the human race.
@@mexicoxv2236 ... Tan avanzados que no conocían la rueda! Sin los españoles, aun hoy seguirían en la edad de piedra! Aunque lo más probable es que los mexicas se hubieran comido hasta los Patagones, porque de eso y para eso vivían! En el mundo más atroz que conoció la historia de la humanidad, su principal fuente de proteínas era la carne humana!!! En un mundo en que el comercio es prácticamente nulo, que el pescado era para las élites y que no existen animales domésticos, ... Como te atreves a decir semejantes barbaridades??? Por cierto, el subcomandante Marcos, cuando pide en Chiapas recuperar sus leyes ancestrales, lo que esta pidiendo eran las leyes y las condiciones que España les había dado, esta pidiendo las leyes de Indias
@@tombellum6815 un hispanofacista que cree que no se conocia la rueda en mesoamerica uno los humilla y vuelven por mas humillacion, cuantas maravillas hay en españa, donde estan las obras arquitectonicas mas grandes del antiguo mundo, las mas altas despues de giza, quienes tenian mas conocicimientos de herbolaria, quienes conocian los procedimientos quirurjicos mas avanzados de la epoca, quienes vivian, mas, entre muchos etec, sorpresa no eran las rats siflicas españolas, y esto es nuevo de todas las pendejasds que han dicho los hispanofacistas es nuevo escuchar que no habia animales domesticos, en mesoamerica estaban los zoologicos mas variados y grandes del mundo, pero este hispanofacista incluso llega a decir que no habia animales domesticos jajajaj, cielos son pateticos,
@@mexicoxv2236 los insultos envilecen a quien los utiliza, no a quien los recibe. A mi me resultan fascinantes las civilizaciones precolombinas y estoy tan seguro que su medicina era superior a la del resto del mundo, como de que no conocían la rueda. Sus maravillosos templos no evolucionaron absolutamente nada en miles de años. El templo mayor se hizo apenas treinta años antes de la llegada de Cortés en los que se sacrificaban más de veinte mil personas por año A ese ritmo, cuanto hubieran tardado en extinguirse los tlaxcaltecas y el resto de aliados de Cortés?? Esas maravillas arquitectónicas no se hacen cuando se construyen pirámides, se hacen cuando en europa se construyen templos góticos. Crees que son comparables? Por cierto, haz un esfuerzo y confecciona una dieta sin carne de cerdo, sin vaca, sin lácteos, sin cabra, sin oveja, sin Cordero, sin cereales, sin la mayor parte de las frutas que conoces, sin gallina común, sin apenas huevos y sin apenas pescados, porque aunque sepas pescar, no tienes medios de transporte para llevar el pescado suficiente para todos, porque no tienes caballos y no tienes carros con ruedas. Con ese escenario, no es que los Mayas o los Aztecas no evolucionarán porque eran menos inteligentes, simplemente estaban aislados, no tenían acceso a las tecnologías del resto de la humanidad y no tenían los animales domésticos que hicieron evolucionar a los otros, tanto como fuente de proteínas, como tecnología para el transporte o la guerra, esto es, en América no sólo no hay caballos, mulas o burros, tampoco hay elefantes o camellos que puedas utilizar como animales de carga. Y si, esto hace aún más fascinantes sus construcciones, pero les deben mucho a aquellos españoles del siglo XVI
I'm subscribed to a lot of great historical channels. I'm surprised I only found your channel now. Though I'd like to point out that the Philippines would have been lost regardless if the Americans came or not as there was already a burgeoning rebel movement with a united front.
1.514 the catolics kings in spain the first country in Europe and possibly the world that legalize interracial marriages; in usa for exemple a anglosaxon country that did not happen until 50 years ago!; Nobody in europe and other continents in the world can possibly said that and if latín América are mestizo nations something that does not happen with the others european powers we slave and racist thoughts from the beginning to the end of their empires Is something unique in a modern history.
@@pikeshotBattles Yes, but not just that. It is because Native Americans were the local population of Spanish territories, hence they were Spanish subjects, just like... Spaniards. They had officially and legally the same status as Spanish people. That's why with the first Spanish constitution both Indians and Whites are considered just Spaniards. Africans did not belong to any Spanish territory, they were not Spanish subjects, they were foreign, alien people. Also mind that generally Spain did not allowed enslavement of Africans either. People could buy slaves, but it was forbbident to turn someone into an slave. THat's why you get that many European countries did took part on enslavement rades in Africa, to caputre people and use them as slaves, but all Spanish expeditions in Africa (very few, by the way) were just exploration. Spain could and did buy slaves, but they had been enslaved by someone else's, most often, other African tribes.
If want to know why Slavery of Africans got horribly out of hand your culprit is the Dutch Slave trade. Before that it was tame when the Portugese and Spanish were at sea. Once the Dutch, French and British got their hands into the pie, it got out of control. And it wouldn't go away until the Royal Navy stamped it out.
I feel you couldve touched on the mass deaths due to viruses, that debilitated and surely affected the natives against invasion. I also find it hard to believe that few Spaniards could overwhelm much larger native forces with weapons that took time to load up even with the use of cavalry. Now I dont trust the spanish historians of the golden age too much as a legitimate source as they looked more for favour of the court, than factual accounts. Don't get me wrong, ive enjoyed the videos as ive studied spanish history for most of my life, and although I've lived amongst them for over thirty + years I simply don't believe them. Some accounts simply don't make sense
I did touch on it in the Cortes episode. Most of the fighting was done by sword and buckler men and cavalry. Firearms only played a decisive role in the Siege of Tenochtitlan. Oh, and also don't forget that lots of natives also fought on the Spanish side.
@@pikeshotBattles I can't remember seeing that I'll take another look at that episode. But if historic estimates are correct 80% of natives died through contacts with Spaniards, now that causes one hell of a psicológical barrier for the locals and it certainly changed the way things might have turned out. Fear definitely took over and with it so did the spanish I know it was mostly sword fighting due to their slow fire weapons that's why I have doubts especially in the battle you mentioned between cortes and the Indian tribe that lived surrounded by aztecs, I believe you mentioned 40,000 warriors against very few Spanish troops. Also the fact they mixed racially with the natives helped them get to positions of power which in turn facilitated their rule
@@pikeshotBattles I have now checked it again and you touch on it yes but very faintly. Even Spanish allieds were dying from chicken pox too and whatever their relationship with the aztecs this must've made them very suspicious of the Spanish. Suddenly people are dying around them with new diseases, surely they couldn't have overlooked the trust factor on the Spaniards. Doesn't quite add up somehow. Unfortunately sources are limited on this subject nd are mainly Spanish. I'm not aware of any local sources that could shed a wider view on what really happened at the time. We're talking 80% died in the native population and that includes enemies and allies alike. By the end of the conquest of Mexico they'd be no one around to defend their land against their invaders. My mistrust in spanish history is still intact till better theories are found.
@@johnnypickles5256 As a medical professional, I can say with certainty that the 80% figure is absurd. Even the Great Plague only killed 1/3 of Europeans, so 1/3 is probably closer to the truth. Also keep in mind that if a large number of men attack as a mob, without proper tactics, than only a small number would be engaged at any given time. See defeat in detail. I imagine the Spanish tactic of boldly rushing in and seeking a decisive engagement was serving exactly this purpose. Remember, before Cortes, when the Spanish were passive and indecisive, they lost most of their battles.
@@pikeshotBattles well those figures are widely shared, even so, it doesn't take the fact away that natives on both sides were dying by contact with Spaniards. Leading back to the trust, fear issues. Also, Their inmune system was also exposed totally to a new virus which no doubt initially took lives at a rapid rate early on. On the war issue, you did say the battle was In open ground? and the sheer numbers of the natives plus the limited firing capacity certainly puts the Spaniards up against it. The ratio per man against the Spanish was ridiculous and with no obvious landscape features to shelter or aid them I find those odds unbelievable. also the natives tactics of attacking in open space but that's another issue. Spains war tactics have been varied during its history as have their results. Just curious which sources did you consult for this battle?
Yes, and the poisoned blankets witl smallpox the gave to the indians (three times), the genocide on irish population, the crimes in Scotland through invading them with heroine, the total exterminstion of natives in Tasmania, the philippinean genocide, they murdered 1.500.000 philippines after Spain left and........, so the criminals accusing others of their crimes.
@@enriquepascual8767 I love how rebuttals to the “black legend” come in two flavours: 1. Spain was evil, just not as evil as people say it was. 2. Spain was evil, but so were other European powers.
which european colonial empire was an angel??? just read about jan pieterzoon coen or king leopold ii of belgium... they were worse than the spanish conquistadors
