Talk:Anglo-Portuguese Alliance

Place new topics at the bottom, please

Spanish Control

What happened during Spanish control of Portugal? Was the treaty ignored and re-implimented after independance or did the SPanish oblige by it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Say1988 (talk • contribs).

In 1580 Phillip II of Spain became Phillip I of Portugal. In other words, as the result of the untimely death of Portugal's young King Sebastian, Phillip (who was closest in line of succession) ended up ruling both Kingdoms. For over the previous 300+ years, Spain had been unsuccessful in its ongoing efforts to absorb Portugal by force. It had now done so through dynastic fluke. Rather than push his luck, Phillip was intelligently advised to tread lightly over Portuguese political, economic and cultural sensibilities. As a result, Spanish "control" of Portugal was very carefully limited and did not extend to the full abrogation of its treaty obligations toward England. Nevertheless, England attacked Portugal and succeeded in taking some colonial assets in the new world. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Grandcross (talk • contribs).

I would say that the Spanish probably ignored it. Consider the case of the Spanish Armada (1588), during the time when Portugal was united with Spain. I think that would be a pretty good example of the fact that the Spanish ignored the alliance-- when it didn't suit them. Mwinslett 19:58, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

The language tone, neutrality and facts contested

Herewith we regret and contest racist imperial and colonial tone of certain sentences (Made bold for refference either change the language or get taged for non neutrality. After German incursions in "Portuguese East Africa"-Denotes an imperial attitude of validating a colonial occupation as like a property (Mozambique), Portuguese troops fought on the Western Front during World War I. In the Second World War Portugal was neutral but the treaty was invoked by the allies to establish bases on the Azores. In 1961 during the "invasion of Portuguese possessions of Goa, Daman and Diu, by the Indian Union,"-Language coming out of colonial era justfying imperial attitude.Indian People and Indian Union Governments treat this as a liberatio and not invasion, We dont need to invade within our own territory. Portugal sought the help of Britain to little effect. During the 1982 Falklands War the facilities of the Azores were again offered to the British Royal Navy. Mahitgar 16:39, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but, whether you want it or not, Mozambique and Goa were part of the Portuguese territory. And when armies of another country occupy Portugal's territory, recognized as Portuguese by the rest of the World, it is an invasion. By the way, I'm not a colonialist, I believe in the self-determination of all peoples. In the Goan case, they managed their "liberation" by means of an invasion of Portuguese territory in India mainly populated by indian people. Cheers. Joaopais 01:05, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

In 1498, Vasco da Gama finally arrived in India by sea, and economic prosperity ensued for Portugal, then with a population of one million, one-tenth the present number." "In 1498, Vasco da Gama " this was not any thing less by invasion this started invasion by portugues of India , India got it liberated this invasion.So my friend I do have strong objection to the position you state. Mahitgar 16:17, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Right, right. Goa was "invaded"... But you missed the point. When Portuguese Goa was re-occupied (400 year later), the Indian Union was a member of the UN, just like Portugal. The UN recognized Goa as Portuguese territory. When the Indian armies marched over Goa they de facto and de jure invaded a Portuguese border with India, which was recognized by Portugal, the former British Empire, India and the rest of the World. It is only seen as a liberation by India. Portugal only recognized Goa as Indian territory in 1974, after the Carnation Revolution. This sums it up. By the way, Vasco da Gama never conquered Goa, he only found a sea route to India. Joaopais 22:52, 15 September 2006 (UTC)

It is absurd to suggest India "liberated" Goa. It invaded a sovereign state that did nothing to warrant the act other than to exist for 400 years next to a country that in its modern form had been in existence for fewer than 20. The Portuguese relinquished Macao after negotiating its absorption by China. It would have done the same in the case of Goa without the need for an overwhelming armed incursion that some now wish to characterize as "liberation". Gene Silva September 17, 2006 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Grandcross (talk • contribs)

India ended the illegitimate 400 year occupation of Goa by foreigners in 1961. The Chinese had every right to do the same to end the Portuguese occupation of Macau, but they were more patient. That doesn't make India's decision to justifiably use force to end the occupation of their territory by a foreign imperialist power illegitimate.108.131.122.159 (talk) 19:25, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

For Christ's sake, just because we use terms used by the empires of old in PASTENSE does not make us evil racist white colonizers. Many of us in the US refer to the BRITISH rule of the colonies as part of "British North America." Using your logic, all of New England should change its name to "New America" or some other politically-correct claptrap as it purports some Anglo-Saxon dominence yadayadayada. Has it ever occured to you that Mozambique WAS CALLED PORTUGESE EAST AFRICA IN THAT TIMEPERIOD????? Has it ever occured to you that some people might find it easier to spell "Portugese East Africa" than Mozambique? I can imagine that someone may find the latter somewhat offensive, but I can understand that, and I can also understand that many non-english speakers might find it easier to reffer to the United States as America and the United Kingdom as England. Hell, many NATIVE english speakers do. Shortens the burden on stationary. If there was something justifiable about this politically-correct claptrap, I would support it. But as of now I cannot see WTF is the big issue here. If he had refered to Mozambique as ex-Portugese East Africa, every time, I could see somthing to get upset about. If I squint hard. But it isn't like that. As for the Macao issue, I am pro-Indian on the issue, but even those who were supporters of the invasion at the time *coughcoughUSAcoughcough* called it an "invasion." Most people call D-Day the "Invasion of France" alongside the "Liberation of France." It is human nature. Take your head out of your PC dreamworld and grow the H*LL up. ELV —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.146.147.150 (talk • contribs)

Racist!!! Sorry, just felt like saying that before someone else does for once. It's fun, and wins every argument. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.185.115.52 (talk) 21:38, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Dubious assertions

Philippa brought to the court the Anglo-Norman tradition of an aristocratic education and gave her children good educations.

Any evidence that good, "aristocratic" education did not exist in the Portuguese court prior to Philippa's arrival? The article almost makes it seem as though she singlehandedly civilized a country of illiterates. FilipeS 13:18, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

I'm glad you ask this because ironically it was the exact oposite. What Philippa did brought was a costume of faithfull marriges to the court and the education of her sons only had the advantage of being a system based on discipline yet it was extremely outdated, old referenced, close minded and weak concerning many things.

The Portuguese education and social system at that time was far ahead of the English one, this is even seen in records from english soldiers in Sintra writing that Sintra was "a most clean city" and writing letters of complain about the state of London at that time. Indeed the portuguese were even seen by the english as having an inappropriate behaviour because of the tolerance of the state. Education existed in the court but the difference is the method. Philippa did educate her sons by the english method of that time, yet in scientific and socio-economical terms Portugal was much more advanced than England at that time, and there were even complains about how the king's sons were being educated by Philippa because her method, because despite being one of discipline it was quick seen by others as outdated and even close minded in many aspects, that why she was frequently not well seen in the court.

You may or may not feel at ease with what I wrote, yet that's what really happened and historical record of the Portuguese court of that time show this. Thorius Maximus 16:22, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Some sources to add to the article would be great. :-) FilipeS 20:27, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

What is the treaty exactly? The article only says what the results of the treaty were.

nature of the alliance during the Iberian Union?

what was the legal status of the alliance when Portugal and Spain were in personal union from 1580-1640? Anglo-iberian relations were about as sour as they could possibly be throughout that period. Was Elizabethan England formally in alliance with Portugal whilst Portugal was party to the Spanish Armada?Zebulin (talk) 09:17, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

the oldest alliance is between Scotland and France it was signed in 1295, some think even earlier, it was ratifid in 1296 Anglo-Portugues was signed 1373 ratified 1383! how many Portuguse Divs fought in Normandy in 1944? how many Scots? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.6.94.34 (talk) 22:01, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

From the angloportuguese society

In 1580, Spain invaded Portugal, and within a year, Portugal was forced into a Union with Spain that lasted for 60 years. This period saw a Spanish ruled Portugal losing control of many of its former dominions. In 1640 the Duke of Braganza asked for the Pope’s assistance to the Portuguese crown but failed to gain that support. The Duke then turned towards the English for help. A fresh treaty was signed between England and Portugal in 1642. This was cemented by the marriage of Catherine of Braganza to King Charles II of England. The alliance defeated the Spanish and guaranteed future Portuguese independence from Spain.218.79.39.113 (talk) 20:20, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

The King of Portugal after 1640 asked for England, Sweden, France, Nederlands(despite the wars with them in many parts of the world) and other countries assistance, but Portugal stayed for many years completely alone with some intensions of help and some help. Portugal was alone in the war and finish the war alone in 1668. This(above)was only 1661, after English Restoration of King Charles II. Only after that the old anglo-portuguese alliance was restablished. Portugal receave Soldiers for its portuguese army and above all receave England´s assistence after 1661. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.113.163.75 (talk) 18:24, 2 August 2010 (UTC)

References

Interesting source of information on this subject

Edgar Prestage (). The Anglo-Portuguese Alliance. Transactions of the Royal Historical Society (Fourth Series), 17, pp 69-100 doi:10.2307/3678521 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.215.5.254 (talk) 14:44, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Salazar's honourary doctorate

Mention of this seems jarringly inappropriate in the Second World War section. A independent university choosing to confer an honourary doctorate is not the action of the British state. Nick Cooper (talk) 13:34, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Well that is a respectable opinion and it should be included in the Wikipedia if properly referenced. However the book "Salazar - A Political Biography", The only complete political biography by a major Portuguese historian, has a different view. The book dedicates a full page to the doctorate, starting like this: "As France buckled under the weight of the German attack, Salazar received a piece of news which would prove to be a triumph for British interests in Portuga, and a demonstration that these did no mind to be fully associated with Salazar's cause. Believing it to be closer to British than to German war aims.....".

As to Life Magazine. No doubt about it, you have a point, it should not be included in this particular article.J Pratas (talk) 11:01, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

"Oldest alliance"

Yes, England and Portugal were allies at some point during the Middle Ages. Yes, the successors states are allies in 2020. However, calling this the "oldest alliance in the world" needs some serious source. 2A01:E0A:135:AED0:6D45:D957:AD22:9C7A (talk) 09:22, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

There are tons of source. This one should be sufficient [1]

“I spoke in a level voice, and made a pause to allow the House to take in the date, 1373. As this soaked in there was something like a gasp.” The prime minister had just invoked the oldest active treaty in the world.--J Pratas (talk) 06:03, 4 June 2020 (UTC)