Talk:Captaincy

Naming of articles

 * Old talk from the article Captaincy General, before merger:

It would be better to have a single article for "Capitaincy/Capitania/Capitanía/Capitaincy-General/Capitão-Mor/etc.", and a separate one for "Capitaincies of Brazil", the latter containing what is presently at Capitania. Some redirects from the Spanish and Portuguese names to the English name would be convenient, too. FilipeS 19:00, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

P.S. Or just merge the articles. FilipeS 19:03, 14 October 2006 (UTC)


 * I think you're right and I tried to merge the articles but to move them it would be necessary to make a request in a special page and the bureaucracy kept me from doing it. Dantadd 21:47, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

There is also a disambiguation page named Captaincy. I have proposed a merger of the three. Let's wait some time, and see if anyone objects.

Meanwhile, I've merged Capitán General and Capitão-Mor into Captain General. FilipeS 22:54, 29 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Merged Captaincy General and Captaincies of Brazil into the disambiguation stub Captaincy. FilipeS 11:53, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

Common use
In Australia and the United Kindom (Scotland), at least, I have found captaincy to pertain most to captaining a sporting team and was quite surprised when I found this article. Maybe this should be accounted for and a "not to be confused with" to be added to something of the nature of Team Captaincies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.175.57.243 (talk) 00:24, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

RE: "All but two failed..."
According to the article, "All but two [captaincies in Brasil] failed, according to initial expectations. The Captaincy of Pernambuco thrived thanks to the sugarcane harvest, and thus formed the basis for the Viceroyalty of Grão-Pará. The Captaincy of São Vicente obtained success through the exploration of the hinterland known as bandeiras, and was the main foundation of the Viceroyalty of Brazil (which would later become the province of São Paulo)."

No source is given. Cambridge History of Latin America confirms the unsourced text. According to it, "Only ten of the captaincies were settled in the sixteenth century; two (Ceara and Santana) were left abandoned by their lords. Of the ten that were settled only two (Sao Vicente and Pernambuco) could be termed genuinely successful before I 550. Of the remaining eight, five were moderately successful, for a time at least (Santo Amaro, Itamaraca, Espirito Santo, Porto Segura, Ilheus), while the remaining three rapidly became complete failures (Sao Tome, Maranhao-Rio Grande and Bahia)."

The source is H. B. Johnson, “The Portuguese Settlement of Brazil, 1500-1580,” vol. 1 of The Cambridge History of Latin America, ed. Jay Parini (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1984), 264.

Sorry, but I'm not good at WikiFormating. Can someone put the above reference into the text as a footnote? Obrigado! --Lacarids (talk) 02:18, 16 August 2012 (UTC)