Talk:Auto-da-fé

message: "traced the bloodline of Christians New and Old"
Words like "blood" and "bloodline" should not be used to indicate ancestry. "Blood" implies contemporary physical traits (similar to how we today think of DNA, somewhat incorrectly, as a carrier of physical traits), and as such, "blood" is a word favored by white supremacists and racists and is often accompanied by racist terminology like "purity of blood" and "not one drop [of non-white blood]."
This sentence should instead say, "traced the ancestry of Christians..." The use of the word "blood" to indicate ancestry should be removed from this article and all Wikipedia articles and replaced with "ancestry."
(I apologize if I've posted this incorrectly, this is my first time ever posting to a Wikipedia talk section.)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:243:820:ED89:1452:ACE2:A065:63A4 (talk) 14:32, 2 February 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: "Blood" is the term used in contemporary documents and legislation. It is exactly from such dark pages of history as this that present day racists and white supremacists draw their terminology, and indirectly get many of their vile ideas. Your suggested sanitized version using 'ancestry' is a) anachronistic b) euphemistic and c) not born out by relevant sources. 82.176.221.176 (talk) 07:24, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

message: I've added tags to two sections, the "History" section and the "A Spectacle in Antisemitism" section to indicate that a large portion of the former and the entirety of the latter are written in essay-style and lack any citations.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1003:B855:33E4:249C:7D07:86CF:BED5 (talk) 17:51, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
thread_title: Style Issues

message: Shouldn't the plural be autos-de-fe rather than auto-de-fes? - Mark Dixon (talk) 15:12, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Several usages and dictionaries concur with autos-da-fé as a plural for auto-da-fé (see the sources I noted in the request-for-move discussion below). I think it makes sense to go with autos-da-fé as the plural term in the context of this article at least. Mooncow (talk) 18:26, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Spelling in Plural

message: 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)
replies: text: "act of auto da fe" is redundant (along the lines of Rio Grande River). --Angr/ 11:13, 24 Jun 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Rewrite?

message: 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)
thread_title:  Auto de fe Dates 

message: 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)
thread_title:  misleading text 

message: "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)
thread_title:  bad writing 

message: This article mentions a couple of times that it was not, typically, torture or excectution.  But it never actually says what actually DID happen.  PerlKnitter (talk) 15:42, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification 

message: "The first Spanish auto de fé took place in Seville, Spain, in 1481; six of the men and women who participated in this first religious ritual were later executed." It would be helpful to know how many men and women took part, out of whom six were executed. It would also help to know for what offense they were executed. Dick Kimball (talk) 18:49, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: Hello.
I am Spanish and in Spanish the word "fe" (faith) does not have an accent. It is wrong to say "Auto de fé", the correct spelling is "Auto de fe".
Therefore, the word "da" does not exist in Spanish, perhaps in Portuguese yes. "De" means "of" and if you want to mean "of the" you have to write "del" (masc.) or "de la" (fem.).  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.235.77.129 (talk) 14:24, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fé 

message: Started my draft of the Cultural References § 72.228.177.92 (talk) 07:46, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Tagged Section 

message: :Feel free to state your position on the renaming proposal by beginning a new line in this section with *Support or *Oppose, then sign your comment with ~~~~. Since polling is not a substitute for discussion, please explain your reasons, taking into account Wikipedia's policy on article titles.
*Support The Ogre (talk) 12:26, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Survey

message: I've removed all cultural references of the type "X mentions 'auto-da-fé' in his work Y" which gave no indication that it's more than a passing mention. I left those where a work is titled "auto-da-fé" or where an indication was given that it's a significant plot element. Huon (talk) 09:22, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cultural references 

message: This book  refers to an auto-da-fe at Minerve, Hérault in 1210. (p 387). Presumably he's referring to the incident described at Minerve, Hérault. This would seem to push the date of the first one up. Any thoughts? Oreo Priest talk 12:46, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  First one 

message: I agree that modern justice was not available at Inquisition procedures. In fact, the modern system of justice grew out of the Inquisition. The Inquisition recorded testimony for later review, which is how we know the details of Joan of Arc's trial, for example. When people had the choice of being tried by a secular court or the Inquisition, they would choose the Inquisition! While modern readers may not take that as grateful support for the Inquisition, they can at least take it as a condemnation of local (lay) court procedure!
Someone keeps inserting that the accused did not have the right of discovery of witnesses and evidence prior to the trial. This is true! This right was invented in the United States in the 1950s or so. It did not exist between Hammurabi and Woodrow Wilson. The idea was to observe how the accused reacted to unexpected evidence and witnesses, the only way people without video cams, lie detectors, fingerprints, and DNA, could think of how to trap a cunning felon. See, for example http://scholarship.law.berkeley.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3142&context=californialawreview. (Need more on "criminal discovery" articles/history in Wikipedia BTW). Student7 (talk) 20:30, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
thread_title: Modern justice not available at Inquisition procedures

message: A statement in the first subsection reads, "The first recorded auto-da-fé was held in Paris in 1242, under Louis IX.[2]" This seems to be true. Then the paragraph goes on to give the fundamental underpinnings of the Spanish Inquisition. What is missing here, is that Louis did not wake up one morning and say, "Gee, this seems to be a great day for an auto da fe!" (which is a Spanish term, BTW). There has to more than just Louis, a victim, and a match. Right now, there is nothing except a link to a hard copy. I couldn't find anything better online, but there are journals that other editors have access to. Student7 (talk) 18:32, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Start of the auto da fe

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Auto-da-fé. 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:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111116184747/http://www.tv3.cat/historiesdecatalunya/cronologia/cron169134131.htm to http://www.tv3.cat/historiesdecatalunya/cronologia/cron169134131.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:49, 22 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: For comparison, see the Britannica 'Auto-da-fé' article. Quoting from it:
:- "Auto-da-fé ... a public ceremony during which the sentences upon those brought before the Spanish Inquisition were read and after which the sentences were executed by the secular authorities. ... They usually comprised a lengthy procession, a solemn mass, an oath of obedience to the Inquisition, a sermon, and the reading of the sentences."
:- "The victims were most frequently apostate former Jews and former Muslims, then Alumbrados (followers of a condemned mystical movement) and Protestants, and occasionally those who had been accused of such crimes as bigamy and sorcery."
Points:
:1. Text such as, "after the trial, officials proclaimed the prisoner's sentence and administered it in an auto-da-fé," state that auto-da-fés included, or consisted of, the carrying out of sentences. This has been commented on several times previously on the talkpage.
:2. The article seems to omit mention of victims other than Jewish conversos.
One further point: at the top of the article a template stating, "This article is written like a research paper or scientific journal," has been included. I think that's very far from the truth.
    ←   ZScarpia   12:02, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that the "research paper" tag does not make sense in this article, as the text seems perfectly understandable. I'm removing it. Also, the number of "citation needed" tags added to this article is clearly overkill. RetiredDuke (talk) 15:39, 14 October 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Comments. 

message: In the first paragraph, under "History" there is a brief discussion of the jizya system and the dhimmi status that Jews and Christians were given under Muslim Spain. This entire argument is basically a quote from the first citation(WNG), that describes itself as "Sound journalism, grounded in facts and Biblical truth". The cited article from WNG starts by saying: 
:″[...]Not so, asserts author Darío Fernández-Morera, who shows how Muslims ran a dhimmi system that was a gangster-like protection racket. Christians and Jews had to pay up and accept second-class citizenship. If they rebelled, Muslims could cut off their heads or make their children sexual slaves.″
I don't believe this is a trustworthy source. The description of the jizya/dhimmi system is entirely different both in content and tone from Wikipedia's own article on this topic. As I don't really know the etiquette for editing Wikipedia, I'd like to ask for help in strengthening that section. Thank you in advance. Drigeolf (talk) 19:54, 15 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title: Jizya(under History section)

message: When did it end in Spain? Unlike Portugal, no date given. 31.94.73.86 (talk) 00:45, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Ommision