The REAL First Settlement in North America Debate

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
4,087
Portugal
Being born in a Spanish colony may make someone a Spanish subject or citizen, but it doesn't make the place where he was born part of Spain. That was one big problem the creoles in the Spanish colonies had which made them seek independence from Spain in about 1800-1820. Men from Spain were awarded most of the government posts in the Spanish colonies and men of 100% pure Spanish ancestry born in the colonies were excluded from most government positions and had little political power. Because the Spanish colonies were NOT part of Spain but belonged to Spain.

Similarly the American colonists had no representation in the British parliament but were subject to the laws made by the British Parliament, because the British colonies in the Americas belonged to Great Britain but where NOT part of the Kingdom of Great Britain and the colonists didn't have the rights they would have had if they lived in the Kingdom of Great Britain.

Old maps used to show the United Kingdom in bright red and British colonies in pink ("possession pink") to show that the colonies belonged to the United Kingdom but where not part of the United Kingdom. And in fact India belonged, more or less, to the United Kingdom but was so much separate from the United Kingdom that it was officially named The Indian Empire and the monarch of the United Kingdom also used the separate title of Emperor/Empress of India.

And just as the Indian Empire was a separate monarchy that was a British colony and possession and had the same monarch as the monarch of the United Kingdom, and was governed from London, the Spanish colonies in the New World were colonies and possessions of the Crown of Castile, and were governed from Madrid, but they were NOT part of the kingdom of Castile any more than the Kingdom of Galicia, the Kingdom of Leon, the Kingdom of Toledo, etc. etc. were, but instead were a separate kingdom with the same monarch as the King of Castile. That kingdom was named the Kingdom of the Indias, or the Kingdom of the East and the West Indias.

This is the title that Philip II used from 1558 to 1581:

Don Phelippe, por la gracia de Dios Rey de Castilla, de Leon, de Aragon, de las dos Sicilias, de Jerusalem, de Nauarra, de Granada, de Toledo, de Valencia, de Galizia, de Mallorcas, de Seuilla, de Cerdeña, de Córdoua, de Córcega, de Murcia, de Jaen, de los Algarues, de Algezira, de Gibraltar, de las yslas de Canaria, de las Yndias, islas y tierra firme del mar Océano,
Conde de Barcelona,
Señor de Vizcaya y de Molina,
Duque de Athenas y de Neopatria,
Conde de Ruysellon y de Cerdania,
Marqués de Oristan y de Gociano,
Archiduque de Austria,
Duque de Borgoña y de Brauante y de Milan,
Conde de Flandes y de Tirol, etc.

In English:

King of Castile, Leon, Aragon, both Sicilies, Jerusalem, Navarra, Granada, Toledo, Valencia, Galicia, Majorca, Sevilla, Sardinia, Cordova, Corsica, Murcia, Jaen, the Algarves, Algecira, Gibraltar, the Canary Islands, the Indias, the Islands & Mainland of the Ocean sea;
Count of Barcelona;
Lord of Biscay, Molina;
Duke of Athens, Neopatria;
Count of Roussillon, Cerdagne;
Margrave of Oristano, Goceano;
Archduke of Austria;
Duke of Burgundy, Brabant, Milan;
Count of Flanders, Tyrol;

. Titles of European hereditary rulers
My question was what kingdom was “Kingdom of the East and the West Indies” and you ended your answered with the already posted list of titles of Filipe II. I am relatively aware of his long list of titles since he was also king of Portugal. By the way, the mentioned title king of Algarve(s) belonged entirely to the kings of Portugal after the Treaty of Badajoz in 1267, and if I am not mistaken Filipe II only took that title after he got the Portuguese crown in 1581, but the title of king of Portugal is not in the list, as it is not the title of “King of the East and the West Indies”, since I also have the idea that was only took after 1581 when the several Iberian crowns were under his head. This just to say that the mentioned list seems to have some anachronisms.

But that reasoning of yours that the titles make the kingdoms is not that clear to me. I am not saying that the reasoning is wrong, I am just saying that is a juridical reasoning that in my opinion raises many, many, doubts, and maybe you or someone that has studied this can bring more information to here.

As for the first paragraphs you stated some sentences that also made me raise some questions, for instance “Because the Spanish colonies were NOT part of Spain but belonged to Spain.” I don’t really understand this sentence, particularly since you said Spain didn’t legally existed at the time. As far as I know the “Spanish” possessions overseas were an integral part of the crown of Castile, as you well state, and this doesn’t have nothing to do with races or representation in Spain or with map representations. Furthermore I won’t comment the UK case, since they had their differences and that would divert the line of conversation. As if we would raise the case of the kingdoms of Aragon, that are much more pertinent to the Spanish case.

So:

That kingdom was named the Kingdom of the Indias, or the Kingdom of the East and the West Indias.
Maybe, but I will need a source on that.

And for the previous statement:

“the Spanish colonies in the New World were colonies and possessions of the Crown of Castile, and were governed from Madrid, but they were NOT part of the kingdom of Castile any more than the Kingdom of Galicia, the Kingdom of Leon, the Kingdom of Toledo, etc. etc. were, but instead were a separate kingdom with the same monarch as the King of Castile.”

I also have some strong doubts since the several kingdoms of the crown of Castile were united not only by the ruler but also (if I am not mistaken) by the Cortes and the Partidas since Alfonso X, a bit different from the kingdoms of the Crown of Aragon, and that would make the titles in the crown of Castile more an heraldry issue than an issue real or legal significance. But the line between the Castilian Crown and its several kingdoms is out of my field, and I think this is quite a gray area… well… at least for me. Anyway the case of the colonies seems different since they were colonized be the crown and for the crown of Castile.
 

martin76

Ad Honorem
Dec 2014
5,876
Spain
Dear tulius.

The Spanish kings used the title Rey de las Indias Orientales y Occidentales (Kings of the Eastern and Western Indies).. .Here you can see all the titles of the Spanish Kings

TITULOS DEL REY DE ESPAÑA - ARBOL DIN�STICO MONARQUIA ESPAÑOLA

You can see: Rey de las Indias Orientales y Occidentales (King of the Eastern and Western Indies).. as you can see. the page is from the Monarchy... but I am sure you know the Tittle has been used by the Kings from 16th Century onwards.
 

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
4,087
Portugal
Dear tulius.

The Spanish kings used the title Rey de las Indias Orientales y Occidentales (Kings of the Eastern and Western Indies).. .Here you can see all the titles of the Spanish Kings

TITULOS DEL REY DE ESPAÑA - ARBOL DIN�STICO MONARQUIA ESPAÑOLA

You can see: Rey de las Indias Orientales y Occidentales (King of the Eastern and Western Indies).. as you can see. the page is from the Monarchy... but I am sure you know the Tittle has been used by the Kings from 16th Century onwards.
Hi Martin, welcome back, nice to “see” you,

And yes, I know that the Filipe II and others used the title “Rey de las Indias Orientales y Occidentales”, my doubt was if it was used it before 1581.

And one of the other doubts is if the title “Rey de las Indias Orientales y Occidentales” implies the existence of a Kingdom of the Eastern and Western Indies inside the crown of Castile, as MAGolding implied and I have doubts.
 

martin76

Ad Honorem
Dec 2014
5,876
Spain
Hi Martin, welcome back, nice to “see” you,

And yes, I know that the Filipe II and others used the title “Rey de las Indias Orientales y Occidentales”, my doubt was if it was used it before 1581.

And one of the other doubts is if the title “Rey de las Indias Orientales y Occidentales” implies the existence of a Kingdom of the Eastern and Western Indies inside the crown of Castile, as MAGolding implied and I have doubts.

Nice to meet you.. I think your doubts are the mine ones too...

I don´t believe too much in Wikipedia but here you can read about the Kingdoms of West Indies...https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reinos_de_Indias

According with this article.. the first time the king used the title of king of West Indies was in 1519!!!! With the Catholic Monarches... the Indies were Personal patrimony.... as the Congo for the KIng of Belgium...Luitpold.. but after they died... the Catholic Monarchs yielded the Indies to the Crown... the Indies were "Special" kingdoms (with their own laws (Leyes de Indias) but without courts) till Charles III when they were named "colonies" or "Dominions"..The 1812 Constitution (the third oldest in the world after American and French) put end to the "Reinos Castellanos de las Indias" (Indies Castillian kingdoms) and gave them the status of Kingdom of Spain... from a Legal point of view from 1812.. Tucson or Montevideo were as Spanish metropolitan soil as Madrid or Barcelona.
 

MAGolding

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
2,466
Chalfont, Pennsylvania
My question was what kingdom was “Kingdom of the East and the West Indies” and you ended your answered with the already posted list of titles of Filipe II. I am relatively aware of his long list of titles since he was also king of Portugal. By the way, the mentioned title king of Algarve(s) belonged entirely to the kings of Portugal after the Treaty of Badajoz in 1267, and if I am not mistaken Filipe II only took that title after he got the Portuguese crown in 1581, but the title of king of Portugal is not in the list, as it is not the title of “King of the East and the West Indies”, since I also have the idea that was only took after 1581 when the several Iberian crowns were under his head. This just to say that the mentioned list seems to have some anachronisms.

But that reasoning of yours that the titles make the kingdoms is not that clear to me. I am not saying that the reasoning is wrong, I am just saying that is a juridical reasoning that in my opinion raises many, many, doubts, and maybe you or someone that has studied this can bring more information to here.

As for the first paragraphs you stated some sentences that also made me raise some questions, for instance “Because the Spanish colonies were NOT part of Spain but belonged to Spain.” I don’t really understand this sentence, particularly since you said Spain didn’t legally existed at the time. As far as I know the “Spanish” possessions overseas were an integral part of the crown of Castile, as you well state, and this doesn’t have nothing to do with races or representation in Spain or with map representations. Furthermore I won’t comment the UK case, since they had their differences and that would divert the line of conversation. As if we would raise the case of the kingdoms of Aragon, that are much more pertinent to the Spanish case.

So:



Maybe, but I will need a source on that.

And for the previous statement:

“the Spanish colonies in the New World were colonies and possessions of the Crown of Castile, and were governed from Madrid, but they were NOT part of the kingdom of Castile any more than the Kingdom of Galicia, the Kingdom of Leon, the Kingdom of Toledo, etc. etc. were, but instead were a separate kingdom with the same monarch as the King of Castile.”

I also have some strong doubts since the several kingdoms of the crown of Castile were united not only by the ruler but also (if I am not mistaken) by the Cortes and the Partidas since Alfonso X, a bit different from the kingdoms of the Crown of Aragon, and that would make the titles in the crown of Castile more an heraldry issue than an issue real or legal significance. But the line between the Castilian Crown and its several kingdoms is out of my field, and I think this is quite a gray area… well… at least for me. Anyway the case of the colonies seems different since they were colonized be the crown and for the crown of Castile.
About the title of King of Algarves.

Portugal 1268:
ego Alfonsus dei gratia Rex Portugalie et Algarbii
Portugal. Titles of European hereditary rulers

Castile 1260:
nos Don Alfonso por la graçia de Dios, Rey de Castiella, de Toledo, de León, de Gallizia, de Seuilla, de Córdoba, de Murçia, de Jahén, e del Algarbe
The site says the title of King of Algarve was added in 1260.

Castile. Titles of European hereditary rulers

Portugal 1459:
Dom Afomso per graça de Deos Rey de Portugall e do Algarve,
senhor de Cepta e d Alcacer em Africa
Portugal. Titles of European hereditary rulers

Castile 1473:
Don Enrrique por la gracia de Dios rey de Castilla de Leon de Toledo de Gallizia de Sevilla de Cordova de Murçia de Jahen del Algarbe de Algezira de Gibraltar et
sennor de Vizcaya et de Molina
Castile. Titles of European hereditary rulers

Portugal 1560:
Dom Sebastiam per graça de deos Rey de Portugal e dos Algarves daquem e dallem maar em Africa,
senhor de Guiné e da conquysta navegaçam, commercio detiopya Arabia Persia e da India, etc.
Portugal. Titles of European hereditary rulers

"Spain" 1563:
Don Phelippe, por la gracia de Dios Rey de Castilla, de Leon, de Aragon, de las dos Sicilias, de Jerusalem, de Nauarra, de Granada, de Toledo, de Valencia, de Galizia, de Mallorcas, de Seuilla, de Cerdeña, de Córdoua, de Córcega, de Murcia, de Jaen, de los Algarues, de Algezira, de Gibraltar, de las yslas de Canaria, de las Yndias, islas y tierra firme del mar Océano,
Conde de Barcelona,
Señor de Vizcaya y de Molina,
Duque de Athenas y de Neopatria,
Conde de Ruysellon y de Cerdania,
Marqués de Oristan y de Gociano,
Archiduque de Austria,
Duque de Borgoña y de Brauante y de Milan,
Conde de Flandes y de Tirol, etc.
. Titles of European hereditary rulers

And many other examples show the kings of Castile using the title of king of Algarve or the Algarves for centuries between 1260 and the Iberian Union in 1581.

About the titles used by Castilian monarchs in reference to their domains in the New World:

Castile 1482:
nos Don Fernando e Donna Ysabel, por la graçia de Dios Rey e Reyna de Castilla, de Léon, de Aragón, de Siçilia, de Toledo, de Balencia, de Galicia, de Mallorcas, de Seuilla, de Çerdena, de Córdoua, de Córçega, de Murcia, de Jahén, de los Algarues, de Algeçira, de Gibraltar,
Conde e Condesa de Barçelona e
sennores de Viscaya e de Molina,
Duques de Atenas e de Neopatria,
Condes de Rosellón e de Cerdania,
Marquesses de Oristán e de Goçiano
Castile. Titles of European hereditary rulers

Castile 1492:
Don Fernando e donna Ysabel por la gracia de Dios rey e reyna de Castilla de Leon de Aragon de Cecilia de Granada de Toledo de Valençia de Galizia de Mallorcas de Sevilla de Cerdena de Cordova de Corçega de Murçia de Jahen de los Algarbes de Algesira de Gibraltar e de las Yslas de Canaria,
conde y condesa de Varçelona y
sennores de Vizcaya y de Molina
duques de Atenas y de Neopatria
condes de Ruysellon y de Cerdania
marqueses de Oristan y de Goçiano
Castile. Titles of European hereditary rulers

So the kingdoms of Ganada and the Canary Islands were added to the list in 1491 according to this site, which indicates that Gibralter and the Canary Islands were considered two separate kingdoms and not one.

Castile 1504:
dona juana por la gracia de dios reyna de castilla de leon de granada de toledo de galicia de sevilla de cerdena de murcia de jahen de los algarbes de algeciras de gibraltar e de las islas de canaria,
señora de vizcaya e de molina
princesa de aragon
archiduquesa de austria
duquesa de borgoña
Castile. Titles of European hereditary rulers

Aragon 1504:
Nos Ferdinandus Dei gratia Rex Aragonum, Siciliæ, citra et ultra Farum, Jerusalem, Valentiæ, Majoricarum, Sardiniæ, Corsicæ,
Comes Barchinonæ,
Dominus Indiorum maris Oceani,
Dux Athenarum et Neopatriæ,
Comes Roxilionis et Ceritaniæ,
Marchio Oristani et Goccani,
administrator et gobernator regnorum Castellæ, Legionis, Granatæ etc. pro Serenissima Regina Johanna, filia nostra carissima
Aragon. Titles of European hereditary rulers

After the death of Queen Isabella of Castile, King Ferdinand of Aragon took the title of Lord of the Indias of the Ocean sea, referring to his and Isabella's domains across the ocean. King Ferdinand ceded his rights in America to his daughter Queen Joanna of Castile by the treaty of Villafalia in 1506.

Castile 1506:
Don Felipe e dona Joana, por la gracia de Dios, rey e reyna de Castilla, de Leon, de Granada, de Toledo, de Galizia, de Sevilla, de Cordoba, de Murçia, de Jahen, de los Algarbes, de Algezira, de Gibraltar e de las Yslas de Canaria y de las Yndias, Yslas y Tierra Firme del Mar Oçeano,
principes de Aragon e de las Dos Seçilias, de Jerusalem,
archiduques de Austria,
duques de Borgoña e de Brabante etc.,
condes de Flandes e de Tirol, etc.,
señores de Bizcaya e de Molina etc.
Castile. Titles of European hereditary rulers

The relevant titles are translated into English as:

Gibraltar, the Canary Islands, the Indias, the Islands & Mainland of the Ocean sea;
And it is a little uncertain whether they are supposed to be one, two, three, or four kingdoms. But since Gibraltar, the Canary Islands, and the Indias, the Islands & Mainland of the Ocean sea were added at three different dates they may be tenatively considered three different kingdoms, so the main question is whether the Indias and the Islands and Mainland in the Ocean sea are one kingdom or two separate kingdoms.

Castile 1518:
nos Doña Juana e Don Carlos, su hijo, por la graçia de Dios Reina y Rey de Castilla, de León, de Aragón, de las Dos Sicilias, de Jerusalem, de Nabarra, de Granada, de Toledo, de Valençia, de Galiçia, de Mallorcas, de Seuilla, de Cerdena, de Córdoba, de Córçega, de Murçia, de Jaén, de los Algarbes, de Algeçira, de Gibraltar, de las yslas Canaria, de las Yndias yslas e tierra firme del mar oçéano,
Condes de Barçelona,
señores de Vizcaya e de Molina,
duques de Atenas e Neopatria,
Condes de Ruisellón e de Çerdania,
Marqueses de Oristán e de Goçiano,
Archiduques de Austria,
Duques de Borgona e de Brabante,
Condes de Flandes e de Tirol, etc.
Castile. Titles of European hereditary rulers

In this case the punctuation in the English translation indicates that the Indias and the Islands and Mainland of the Ocean sea are two separate Kingdoms.

And so it goes for title after title and ruler after ruler, with no strong indication whether the Indias and the Islands and Mainland in the Ocean Sea refer to the same kingdom or two separate kingdoms.

"Spain" 1583:
Don Phelipe, por la gracia de Dios, Rey de Castilla, de Leon, de Aragon, de las Dos Sicilias, de Jerusalen, de Portugal, de Navarra, de Granada, de Toledo, de Valencia, de Galicia, de Mallorcas, de Sevilla, de Cerdeña, de Córdoua, de Córcega, de Murcia, de Jahen, de los Algarues, de Algecira, de Gibraltar, de las islas de Canaria, de las Indias orientales y occidentales, Islas y tierra firme del mar Océano,
archiduque de Austria,
duque de Borgoña y de Brauante y Milan,
conde de Abspurg, de Flandes y de Tirol y de Barcelona,
Señor de Vizcaya y de Molina, etc.
. Titles of European hereditary rulers

So after acquiring Portugal Philip II added Portugal to his titles, and replaced The Indias with the East and the West Indias. Since the title of Islands and Mainland in the Ocean sea was retained, it seems to refer to a different kingdom than the Indias. And One has to wonder whether the Kingdom of the East and the West Indias had the same territory as the Kingdom of the Indias or a somewhat different territory.

"Spain" 1705:
Don Carlos tercero por la gracia de Dios Rey de Castilla, de Leon, de Aragon, de las dos Sicilias, de Jerusalem, de Navarra, de Granada, de Toledo, de Valencia, de Galicia, de Mallorca, de Sevilla, de Cerdena, de Cordova, de Córcega, de Murcia, de Jaén, de los Algarves, de Algecira, de Gibraltar, de las Islas de Canaria, de las Indias orientales y occidentales, Islas, y tierra firme del mar océano;
Archi-duque de Austria;
Duque de Borgona, de Brabante, y Milan;
Conde de Abspurg, de Flandes, Tirol, y Barcelona;
Señor de Vizcaya, de Molina &c.
. Titles of European hereditary rulers

The title of king of Portugal was dropped in 1668 after Portugal became independent in 1640. King Charles was the future Emperor Charles VI, the Austrian claimant in the war of the Spanish Sccesion.

"Spain" 1804:
Don Carlos por la gracia de Dios, Rey de Castilla, de León de Aragón, de las dos Sicilias, de Jerusalem, de Navarra, de Granada, de Toledo, de Valencia, de Galicia, de Mallorca, de Menorca, de Sevilla, de Cerdeña, de Córdoba, de Córcega, de Murcia, de Jaén, de los Algarbes, de Algeciras, de Gibraltar, de las Islas de Canaria, de las Indias Orientales y Occidentales, Islas y Tierra-firme del Mar Océano;
Archiduque de Austria,
Duque de Borgoña, de Brabante y Milán;
Conde de Habsburgo, de Flandes, Tirol y Barcelona;
Señor de Vizcaya y de Molina, &c.
So in 1804 the royal titles of the Spanish monarch still included: "Gibraltar, the Canary Islands, East & West Indias, the Islands & Mainland of the Ocean sea", which were presumably four separate kingdoms, though there is a possibility that the East and West Indias and the Islands and Mainland of the Ocean sea were a long and complex title for a single kingdom.

So it seems that the title of "King of the East and the West Indias" was first used after the conquest of Portugal in 1581. But there is no proof that the borders of that kingdom included any Portuguese colonies in southest Asia, since the title seems to have replaced the the title of "King of the Indias" that was used since 1506, and was not dropped when the title of King of Portugal was dropped.

So when Martin de Arguelles, Jr. was born in St. Augustine, Florida, in 1566, was he born in the territory of the The Kingdom of the Indias or in the territory of the Kingdom of the Islands and Mainland in the Ocean sea?
 

Tulius

Ad Honorem
May 2016
4,087
Portugal
About the title of King of Algarves.

Portugal 1268:

Portugal. Titles of European hereditary rulers

Castile 1260:

The site says the title of King of Algarve was added in 1260.

Castile. Titles of European hereditary rulers

Portugal 1459:

Portugal. Titles of European hereditary rulers
MAGolding,

Thanks for the links.

“Algarve” (singular, Al-Gharb in Arabic meaning the West) was conquered in 1249/50/51 by Portugal. The Moorish Taifa of Silves had declared itself a tributary of Castile to avoid the conquest, and was given to the Castilian king in a will. So when the Portuguese conquered the territory the king of Castile demanded the rights above it. The divergence between the two kings was resolved in the Treaty of Badajoz in 1267, as I stated in the previous post. The treaty recognized that the territory belonged to Portugal but that the king of Portugal was in Algarve a subject of the king of Castile in the Medieval spirit.

In the 15th century with the conquest of Fortress in the North of Africa the kings of Portugal took the title “Rei de Portugal e dos Algarves, D'Áquem e D'Álem Mar…” that means “king of Portugal and of the Algarves from this and the other side of the Sea…” since the Fortress in Africa were also in “the West” (Al-Gharb).

There was a title but there was never a parallel kingdom or structure.

I wasn’t aware that the Castilian kings continued to use the title after 1267, but under the treaty that was possible even if they didn’t had power there, or even if the kingdom the facto didn’t exist.

Castile 1473:

Castile. Titles of European hereditary rulers

Portugal 1560:

Portugal. Titles of European hereditary rulers

"Spain" 1563:

. Titles of European hereditary rulers

And many other examples show the kings of Castile using the title of king of Algarve or the Algarves for centuries between 1260 and the Iberian Union in 1581.

About the titles used by Castilian monarchs in reference to their domains in the New World:

Castile 1482:

Castile. Titles of European hereditary rulers

Castile 1492:

Castile. Titles of European hereditary rulers

So the kingdoms of Ganada and the Canary Islands were added to the list in 1491 according to this site, which indicates that Gibralter and the Canary Islands were considered two separate kingdoms and not one.

Castile 1504:

Castile. Titles of European hereditary rulers

Aragon 1504:

Aragon. Titles of European hereditary rulers

After the death of Queen Isabella of Castile, King Ferdinand of Aragon took the title of Lord of the Indias of the Ocean sea, referring to his and Isabella's domains across the ocean. King Ferdinand ceded his rights in America to his daughter Queen Joanna of Castile by the treaty of Villafalia in 1506.

Castile 1506:

Castile. Titles of European hereditary rulers

The relevant titles are translated into English as:



And it is a little uncertain whether they are supposed to be one, two, three, or four kingdoms. But since Gibraltar, the Canary Islands, and the Indias, the Islands & Mainland of the Ocean sea were added at three different dates they may be tenatively considered three different kingdoms, so the main question is whether the Indias and the Islands and Mainland in the Ocean sea are one kingdom or two separate kingdoms.

Castile 1518:

Castile. Titles of European hereditary rulers

In this case the punctuation in the English translation indicates that the Indias and the Islands and Mainland of the Ocean sea are two separate Kingdoms.

And so it goes for title after title and ruler after ruler, with no strong indication whether the Indias and the Islands and Mainland in the Ocean Sea refer to the same kingdom or two separate kingdoms.

"Spain" 1583:

. Titles of European hereditary rulers

So after acquiring Portugal Philip II added Portugal to his titles, and replaced The Indias with the East and the West Indias. Since the title of Islands and Mainland in the Ocean sea was retained, it seems to refer to a different kingdom than the Indias. And One has to wonder whether the Kingdom of the East and the West Indias had the same territory as the Kingdom of the Indias or a somewhat different territory.

"Spain" 1705:

. Titles of European hereditary rulers

The title of king of Portugal was dropped in 1668 after Portugal became independent in 1640. King Charles was the future Emperor Charles VI, the Austrian claimant in the war of the Spanish Sccesion.

"Spain" 1804:

So in 1804 the royal titles of the Spanish monarch still included: "Gibraltar, the Canary Islands, East & West Indias, the Islands & Mainland of the Ocean sea", which were presumably four separate kingdoms, though there is a possibility that the East and West Indias and the Islands and Mainland of the Ocean sea were a long and complex title for a single kingdom.

So it seems that the title of "King of the East and the West Indias" was first used after the conquest of Portugal in 1581. But there is no proof that the borders of that kingdom included any Portuguese colonies in southest Asia, since the title seems to have replaced the the title of "King of the Indias" that was used since 1506, and was not dropped when the title of King of Portugal was dropped.
Thanks again for the extensive list. But I don’t think that it removes my previous main doubt, that was “does the existence of the title implies the existence of the kingdom?”

As I stated, I have profound doubts. In the case of Algarve, or Algarves there were no differentiated structures, as far as I recall, and I think that the same happened with many of the territories mentioned in the titles of the Spanish kings.

Besides in the case of the Indies, for the 1580-1640 period, the West Indies belonged to the crown of Castile and the East Indies belonged to the crown of Portugal, the two crowns weren’t merged, so the “kingdoms” weren’t merged, there was not king of East and West Indies, it was just a pompous title, like the title king of Jerusalem.

The only exception in the East was basically the Philippines that belonged to the Viceroyalty of New Spain (Mexico), so not sure if it would be considered East Indies. And in the West the exception would be Brazil, that was the only part of the America that belonged to the Crown of Portugal. But again the colonies didn’t had a merged management during the Iberian Union, on the contrary, for instance between Manila (under New Spain) and Macau (under Goa) there was a strong competition, with nefarious consequences for the Iberians in Japan.

I think that to resolve this we would need more than the list of titles, but I am not sure if I am willing to research this deeply.

So when Martin de Arguelles, Jr. was born in St. Augustine, Florida, in 1566, was he born in the territory of the The Kingdom of the Indias or in the territory of the Kingdom of the Islands and Mainland in the Ocean sea?
I think that is safe to say that he was born in a territory of the crown of Castile :D
 

royal744

Ad Honorem
Jul 2013
9,516
San Antonio, Tx
Mr. Hall should have said, and perhaps did say, that Jamestown was the first permanent English settlement in North America.

As to La Isabella, it deserves a mention in the same way that Roanoke deserves a mention in the history of English colonization attempts, but Santo Domingo deserves the full credit. History does not remember those who try, only those who succeed. La Isabella and Roanoke are important because they show the earliest interest in colonization, but Santo Domingo and Jamestown mark success. We study history to understand how the modern world came to be. If La Isabella and Roanoke had never happened, the world would still largely be as it is. The Americas eventually became divided into Spanish-speaking and English-speaking regions (and other languages, too) largely because of successes that followed on from Santo Domingo and Jamestown, not from the failures of La Isabella and Roanoke.
Maybe we could turn this around and speculate on what might have been i La Isabella and Roanoke had succeeded instead of vanished into history.
 

martin76

Ad Honorem
Dec 2014
5,876
Spain
Maybe we could turn this around and speculate on what might have been i La Isabella and Roanoke had succeeded instead of vanished into history.
I don´t think history would have changed too much... Isabella was in La Hispaniola... so...at the end of day... everything would have beenn as it really hapenned...And Roanoke was in North Carolina... as later it was British.. so... I guess everything would have been as it was...
Different if Roanoke would have been settled in Texas... for example.
 

martin76

Ad Honorem
Dec 2014
5,876
Spain
MAGolding,





I think that is safe to say that he was born in a territory of the crown of Castile :D
In the kingdom of Spain...from January 1st, 1517, when the Pope Leo X gave the title of King of Spain to Charles (Joanne the crazy´s son)... he was appointed Hispaniarum Rex Catholicus. From May 4th, 1493 the Spanish Monarchs were Catholic Kings by Pope's concession:
Catholicos reges, et principes.

So Martín de Argüelles the first European to be born in what today are the USA... born in the Crown of Castile in the Kingdom of Spain. He was a Spanish child... as Otto von Bismarck is German.. although he was not born in Germany.. but in Prussia.