Talk:Auto de fe
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, which collaborates on articles related to the Roman Catholic Church. To participate, edit this article or visit the project page for details. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the Project's quality scale. |
| Low | This article has been rated as Low-importance on the Project's importance scale. |
 |
Auto de fe is part of WikiProject Portugal, a project to improve all Portugal-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Portugal-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome. |
|
Portugal To-do:
|
|
 |
Auto de fe is part of WikiProject Middle Ages, a project for the community of Wikipedians who are interested in the Middle Ages. For more information, see the project page and the newest articles. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. | ||
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. | ||
|
Article Grading: |
|||
|
WikiProject Middle Ages To do:
|
|||
Contents |
[edit] Spelling
I've always heard "auto da fe", with "da" instead of "de", and that it's Portuguese rather than Spanish. Is changing "da" to "de" the only difference between the Portuguese phrase and the Spanish, or could this perhaps be an error? Michael Hardy 16:32 Apr 21, 2003 (UTC)
That's the only difference and auto de fe is more historically accurate. So long as auto da fe is redirected I think it's fine.Jacquerie27
- The difference is that da means "of the" and de just "of". -- Error
I didn't know about the spelling with a until I read this, but I see that some Portuguese speakers do use it. However, auto de fé (with or without hyphen) is the most common spelling by far, as a web search will confirm. This is perhaps not a big deal, but the article gives the misleading impression that only the spelling with a exists in Portuguese, when it's almost the opposite. FilipeS 20:05, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
-
- Also on the translation, I don't agree with "Auto" as "Act", Gil Vicente has several works titled "auto" which give them a more suitable sense of "Podium" or "Altar", a place where faith is being displayed. Galf 09:57, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
On the other hand, FilipeS, I only ever eard about the spelling with a! Go figure. The Ogre 13:43, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Spelling in Plural
Shouldn't the plural be autos-de-fe rather than auto-de-fes? - Mark Dixon (talk) 15:12, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Rewrite?
Can these two sentences be coordinated better?:
-
- In Lisbon, the Rossio square was the burning place.
- The Inquisition enjoyed only limited power in Portugal, lasting only four years, with only one act of auto da fe in Porto.
Without knowing a thing about the subject, it appears to me that it should read:
-
- The Inquisition enjoyed only limited power in Portugal, lasting only four years. The one act of auto da fe in Porto took place in Lisbon's Rossio Square.
Would this be incorrect? -Willmcw 10:09, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
- "act of auto da fe" is redundant (along the lines of Rio Grande River). --Angr/tɔk tə mi 11:13, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
If the first auto de fe took place in 1481, how could Pedro Berruguete paint Saint Dominic presiding over an auto de fe in 1475? He couldn't. It seems that he actually did it in 1490. Elad
[edit] Auto de fe Dates
The caption lists the date of the auto de fe painting as 1475, but how is this possible if the Inquisition didn't begin in Spain until 1478 and the first auto de fe in 1482 (and Portugal in the 1500s), as the article states? Is the painting from a site outside of Spain that began holding autos de fe earlier? Draeco 06:29, 22 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] misleading text
I'm inserting new information in the article and removing the paragraphs bellow:
- "Punishments for those convicted by the Inquisition ranged from wearing a special identifying penetential tabard or sanbenit, through other penances or terms of imprisonment, to the ultimate penalty of being "relaxed", that is, being released to the secular arm. The secular state performed executions, which generally punished a repeated offense of heresy, following a first conviction. If prisoners in this category remained obdurate, the executioners burned them alive; but if such prisoners became reconciled to the Roman Catholic Church, the executioners would strangle them at the stake before lighting the fire."
- "There was only one act of auto da fe in Porto. In Lisbon, the Rossio square served as the burning place."
- "The last execution due to the Spanish Inquisition – the last auto de fe – involved the schoolmaster Cayetano Ripoll and took place on July 26, 1826. His trial (on a charge of deism) lasted nearly two years. He died by garotting on the gibbet after repeating the words, "I die reconciled to God and to man"."
While there is some valuable information above, almost all of it is not really related with the auto-de-fe. The trial/investigation was not part of the auto de fe. The punishments did not occur in the auto de fe. The above paragraphs, together with the historically inaccurate picture that illustrate this article, were generating much confusion. --Leinad ¬ 
pois não? 06:59, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
--Something Else not about above paragraphs-- To learn more about the auto-de-fe, read The Cross By Day, The Mezuzah By Night. It is a fiction book but it shows a lot about the autos- de- fe and also about the marranos and Edict of Expulsion. I am doing a class project about the marranos and that helped a lot.
[edit] bad writing
"However, in his book Jewish Pioneers and Patriots published in 1942 by The Jewish Publication Society of America draws attention ..."
Whose book? Who draws attention? -- Jibal 19:29, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
- I have removed the section altogether. Removed text follows:
- However, in his book Jewish Pioneers and Patriots published in 1942 by The Jewish Publication Society of America draws attention to information that raises a contradiction in some areas as to the above paragraph. Beginning on page 75, chapter 6 entitiled "The Martyrdom of Francisco Maldonaldo de Silva"; it details an AVTO DE LA FE and has a picture of the announcement being held by The Tribunal of the Holy Office of the Inquisition of Peru, on the 23rd of January, 103 years after the discovery of Peru. Diego Núñez de Silva is the person in question. The account is too lengthy to relate.
That the account is "too lengthy" is no excuse not to explain just about what it says and how does it contradict the other information given in the article: that "auto da fe" (or "auto de fe") was an act of public penance of a sentenced heretic and reading of his sentence; that it took place in Spain, Portugal, and their colonies; and that it is inappropriate to refer to the actual execution as "auto da fe" ("act of faith"). - Mike Rosoft (talk) 20:45, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
