Talk:Chapultepec Castle

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The only castle in America?[edit]

I had already seen the page about US castles. But there most be a reason why an official mexican page says so. Maybe it has something else that makes it unique in America, but we could still say that it's the only castle in Latinamerica. Carlosr chill 21:52, 4 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ 14:43, 5 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I think it has been said that it is the only real "Castle" in the Americas because it actually housed Royalty...the Mexican Emperor and Empress. To my knowledge there has never been another Castle or Palace made to house Royalty in the Americas, except maybe the Brazilian Royals???...I don't know if they had any royal residences in Brazil, but I have never heard of one. Anyway, it would be not only the ONLY Castle in Latin America, but all of America...North and South. --C.Kent87 03:05, 31 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
'Iolani Palace in Hawai'i is an example of a royal palace. Charles 03:45, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
What do you mean? ;] We were talking about the Americas. That is a good example of a Palace, though. --C.Kent87 05:52, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well, you said that you were unaware of any palace or castle in the Americas to house royalty. Hawaii was a kingdom before becoming a US state and it has a royal palace. Now, as for other castles... That is up to debate. What exactly constitutes a castle? Places like Belcourt Castle or Biltmore Estate are chateaux, but there are other buildings in the US built as castles in the more traditional sense. Charles 06:57, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, I was talking about the continental Americas...I suppose Hawaii is a part of America in a way..I mean yes it is... My reasoning wasn't that Chapultepec is the only 'Castle' in the Americas, I meant it was the only Castle to house Royalty/Soveriegns in North America. There was also the Brazilian Empire and I'm sure they had Castles -just to make it a little clearer. I don't think it'd be terrible to say that Chapultepec comes closer to the 'ideal' Castle than any others around these parts...and even to say it is the only Castle in the Americas (I haven't seen anything on the Brazilian Emperor's)... I'm not sure what constitutes a real castle, though. Thanks. --C.Kent87 21:39, 16 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Whether it's true or not (did anyone ever find a reference?), this doesn't seem like a very noteworthy claim to me. Other buildings in Mexico City (much less the rest of the Americas) have housed sovereign rulers, and there are many residential buildings fortified to the standards of different ages. As it did not become normal for a ruler to live somewhere so dangerous that it needed fortification until the invention of aerial warfare, whether a "sovereign" ever lived in such a place doesn't seem very interesting to me. Aoeuidhtns (talk) 14:31, 25 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
On the contrary, I think it is worth mentioning. It provides a link between this revival castle and earlier castles which were high-status residences, sometimes belonging to royalty. For example, Richard the Lionheart lived in Château-Gaillard. That the site was fortified does not mean it was dangerous, often fortification (especially in the era of effective artillery) was just a status symbol (keeping up with contemporary fashionable Gothic Revival architecture), or harking back to the medieval period. It's an interesting titbit that I think should be included. Nev1 (talk) 16:41, 26 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
What about Citadelle Laferriere and Sans-Souci Palace (Haiti)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.71.240.189 (talk) 04:56, 7 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not a castle at all. Check the Castle article, no castle could or can be built in the Americas as post-columbine America is by definition not in the Middle Ages. Only extemporaneous revivals with little functional or aesthetic original elements. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 181.46.202.70 (talk) 18:21, 21 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

What about the official residences of the british royal family in Canada?89.13.249.223 (talk) 13:54, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article title[edit]

This article was located at Chapultepec Castle and moved a few days ago to Castle of Chapultepec, which is a more literal translation of its Spanish name. "Chapultepec Castle" is the more common name in English, as evidenced by Google. Per our policy on naming, we shoud prefer the most common usage in English for article titles, so I'm moving the article back to the previous title, following a request at Requested moves. -GTBacchus(talk) 06:11, 17 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]


Cleanup[edit]

There are a lot of grammatical and spelling errors on the page, and they really need to be fixed. 68.199.18.70 02:28, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for noticing ; ] C.Kent87 03:18, 4 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Should we include this???[edit]

President Fox tried to make it the presidential residence again, but he didn't get his way. I mean, it IS kinda relevant, right??? And it's also funny, so it could cheer up someone's day if they were reading this just for a homework or something.--Plavalagunanbanshee 21:30, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Capture of Chapultepec[edit]

The Marines did not capture Chapultepec castle. Winfield Scott marched on Mexico city with a force of between 12,000 and 13,000 men, which included one Battalion of Marines, 354 men. The Marine Battalion was assigned to A division commanded by General John A. Quiltman. General Quiltman’s division did not fight at Contreras, Churubusco, or El Molino del Rey, the battles preceding the assault on Chapultepec.

In the assault, of the Marine Battalion, one company actually got into Chapultepec castle. Most of the troops assaulting Chapultepec were Soldiers, not Marines. Soldiers, not Marines, did most of the fighting which captured Chapultepec. Most of the Marine Battalion supported Quiltman’s part of the assault with musket fire.

The capture of Chapultepec and the ensuing capture of Mexico City was primarily an Army accomplishment.

The source is Semper Fidelis: The History of the United States Marine Corps: the Expanded and Revised Edition by Allan R. Willett, published 1991, pages 77-79. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Exarmydoc (talk • contribs) 21:43, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Picture[edit]

I thought the editors of this article might like to know that on December 5, 2009 this image (a 19th-century lithograph of the Military College) was the Featured Picture on the main page. The knock on effect was that this article got over 6,000 views. That's a lot of people who took a look, so well done. Nev1 (talk) 02:01, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Royal? Sovereign?[edit]

As this article says it's the only "royal" castle that housed "sovereigns" — I just wonder, are there no surviving castles of the Aztec, the Inca or other advanced pre-contact civilizations? I ask just because I don't know. Or are Native Americans perhaps not qualified for being "royals" or "sovereigns"? --Vesteinn (talk) 11:02, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Paseo de la Reforma name change[edit]

I find the bit about the renaming of Paseo de la Reforma confusing. I don't know if it really belongs in this article (it isn't mentioned in the article on the Paseo itself). It says that the name was changed after the end of the Reform War, but the Reform War, according to Wikipedia, ended in 1861, before the boulevard was even built by Maximilian. That doesn't mean the new name wasn't inspired by that war, but the way it is phrased suggests a different sequence of events to me - boulevard, war, name change, instead of war, boulevard, name change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.73.252.224 (talk) 23:40, 12 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Chapultepec Castle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

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

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

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

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:36, 2 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 16:09, 12 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Chapultepec_Castle&oldid=1194728323"