Talk:Inca Garcilaso de la Vega

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Untitled[edit]

I am told the general academic consensus about the Comentarios Reales by G de la Vega nowadays is that it bears more importance as a historical document and literary achievement than as a reliable source for historic information.

I found numerous inuendo to discredit "El Inca"'s integrity, but no facts whatsoever to back it up. I do not speak Spanish and rely on translations.

Question: is there anything written in the Comentarios Reales which can be construed as a fiction for a fact.

Confusing template[edit]

I added the confusing template as it looks like the various sections of this article appear in at least two, and sometimes three different versions. The article isn't as legible as it is now.--Ramdrake 01:28, 22 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:1975garcilaso billete.jpg[edit]

Image:1975garcilaso billete.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 04:08, 12 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Nacionality of Garcilaso[edit]

Please, do not change the nacionality of Garcilaso de la Vega. He wasn't peruvian, around 1530 Peru didn't exist. As son of spanish soldier and born in Spanish territory, there are no reason to call him "peruvian".--Edhu9 (talk) 13:02, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

He wasn't "Spanish" either, as he wasn't from Spain. He was from the Spanish viceroyalty of Peru.--Cúchullain t/c 18:24, 4 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]
On the contrary, the term "Peru" did exist during those times and the name "Peruvian" was quite common.--MarshalN20 | Talk 14:23, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Name[edit]

Can anyone explain his name?
There seems to be little connection between his given name at birth (Gómez Suárez de Figueroa) and the name by which he was known (Garcilaso de la Vega). If his mother was baptized Isabel Suárez Chimpu Ocllo the "Suarez" bit makes sense, and "Gomez" (I presume) was his given name; so where does the "de Figueroa" come from? and if he went by his fathers name later, wouldn't that make him "Gomez Garcilaso de la Vega"?
And does he have any relationship with the other Garcilaso de la Vega, whose father I note was Pedro Suárez de Figueroa? Moonraker12 (talk) 16:49, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Figueroa is one of the families that De la Vega is descended from. I am not familiar with his family tree, but I would assume it is the name of his paternal grandmother. It was likely chosen because it is a close relation and because, as an illegitimate child, De la Vega was initially denied the use of his father's surname. JDF6574 (talk) 22:45, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, that sheds a bit of light on it... thanks! Moonraker12 (talk) 18:00, 16 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Move? 1[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

I’m thinking of moving this.
The current title "Inca Garcilaso…" comes across as a racist slur (like "Jew Suss", and the like), and his nickname seems to be "El Inca" (with the article), so (if we need to disambiguate him from the other Garcilaso) a better title for the article would be [[El Inca, Garcilaso de la Vega ( or even [[“El Inca” Garcilaso…. Comments? Moonraker12 (talk) 18:22, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's better to do it.
I read his book in the Yuri Knorozov translation. There his name was "El Inca Garcilaso de la Vega", the book is very interesting btw. Denis Tarasov (talk) 14:43, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK, done. I went with "Garcilaso de la Vega (El Inca)" in the end, as a) it affects the search function less, b) it follows WP:D, and c) it dissuades some bright spark from moving it back, per WP:THE. I've used the cited name in the header. Regards, Moonraker12 (talk) 15:27, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


Garcilaso was highly proud of his Inca heritage, and in his works actively tries to distinguish them from the other Amerindian groups in Peru (akin to the contrast of savagery and civilization). Him being known as "Inca Garcilaso" is not racist, and the example used ("Jew Suss") does not apply to this case.--MarshalN20 | Talk 14:31, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Moved again[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

This page was moved back to the previous title ("Inca Garcilaso de la Vega"), without discussion and without regard to the talk page here. I've moved it back to the agreed title ("Garcilaso de la Vega (El Inca)"); if anyone feels the previous title was better, I suggest it be taken to WP:RM with an explanation why. Moonraker12 (talk) 13:53, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You wrote on my talk page as if there had been a consensus on the article title change, which is not the case (two editors cannot make a consensus for an article such as this one). If you would like to change the article title to "Garcilaso de la Vega (El Inca)", please use WP:RM.
By the way, the name "El Inca Garcilaso" or "Inca Garcilaso" is not racist. This is an accepted way of naming this writer in order to distinguish him from the Spanish poet. Best regards.--MarshalN20 | Talk 14:15, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Here is also a Google Books result with the specific search of "Inca Garcilaso" ([1], 197,000 hits). Regards.--MarshalN20 | Talk 14:18, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have no opinion on this yet, but as Garcilaso de la Vega (El Inca) had been the stable name for over 2 years and it was the only one that was discussed, the article shouldn't be moved without further discussion. Since the move to Inca Garcilaso de la Vega has obviously been challenged, this needs a wider consensus and ought to go through WP:RM.--Cúchullain t/c 14:59, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.


Requested move 3[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Garcilaso de la Vega (El Inca) → Inca Garcilaso de la Vega – The title "Inca Garcilaso de la Vega" is the WP:COMMONNAME. Google Books show a hit of 1,950,000 (see [2]) when searching for "Inca Garcilaso de la Vega", and also has a substantial 443,000 hits on English-only results (see [3]). Moreover, and this is probably beside the point (but does show the common nature of the proposed new title), the Estadio Garcilaso in Cusco has the full name of "Estadio Inca Garcilaso de la Vega." MarshalN20 | Talk 15:07, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • I would oppose this:
Firstly, the reason previously given for this move was “to distinguish him from the Spanish poet", which is plainly un-necessary.
Second, the proposed name may be a common name in Spanish, but it is not so in English. Of The Google searches given here (and there) the simple numbers only show he existed and is well-known; an analysis of the results show the format “El Inca Garcilaso… “ or “the Inca...” (ie with the definite article) is favoured by a factor of two to one (in English and Spanish) over “Inca Garcilaso.." and that the latter are predominantly Spanish.
Third, it may not be so in Spanish, but in English the proposed format has a racist undertone; it is the difference between referring to someone as (for example) “African Kunta Kinte" and “the African...", or (better) "Kunta Kinte, the African" and has the same tone (as previously stated) as "Jew Suss" or "Bantu Steve Biko"
The current title is clearly disambiguated (per WP:DAB), clearly includes the definite article (per WP:THE), reflects the common name in English, and is uncontroversial; the proposed new name fails in every respect. Moonraker12 (talk) 13:01, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • I would suggest having a disambiguation page for "Garcilaso de la Vega" which links to Garcilaso de la Vega (poet) and Garcilaso de la Vega (Peruvian chronicler). That is how we usually handle naming conflicts, not by locating one at a nickname and the other at the main title.User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 14:04, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Garcilaso de la Vega (poet) and Garcilaso de la Vega (chronicler) does sound like a good alternative. Since only two commentaries have been made, I suppose neither of you would mind if this move request was quickly scrapped for a new one?--MarshalN20 | Talk 19:09, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.
  • I've restored the original form of this proposal: the requested move was not to "Garcilaso de la Vega (chronicler)" at all, it was to "Inca Garcilaso de la Vega"; and editing it to say otherwise, then archiving, is highly misleading. I've put it back to the way it was. Moonraker12 (talk) 10:43, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Improved requested move[edit]

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 18:04, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

– Based on the above discussions, and since both Garcilaso are notable, it would be better to have the aricle Garcilaso de la Vega be a disambiguation page (which directs to both notable folk, and possibly also institutions or locations named after both folk). Along with that, these two folk would be separated by their primary roles (chronicler and poet). MarshalN20 | Talk 19:12, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support per nom and own previous reasoning. User:Maunus ·ʍaunus·snunɐw· 19:48, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support a disambiguation page would be good -- 65.94.79.6 (talk) 23:10, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per nom. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:18, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: your proposed arrangement sounds logical enough, but you need to say why it would be an improvement. The current arrangement ( using this Garcilaso’s nickname, El Inca, as diaasambiguator) qualifies per WP:COMMONNAME, while your arrangement would fall foul of WP:TWODABS. If you want to ignore all rules you need to say why it would be better. Why exactly is it necessary to change? Moonraker12 (talk) 10:35, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    • Moonraker, my explanation above states both Garcilaso are notable (primary topics), and this is traditionally solved by having their primary roles in life in parentheses. Also, in discussions above you claim the term "Inca" is a racist insult, and yet now you are defending its inclusion in the title per WP:COMMONNAME? Please pardon me, but I am not understanding your point.--MarshalN20 | Talk 13:44, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To your second point first, the problem isn’t with the word Inca, it’s the lack of the definite article. "Inca" (without the article) is disdainful; "the Inca" (with it) is a relatively neutral reference to his ethnic origin; "The Inca" (or "El Inca") (with capitals) is a proper name.
As to your first point, I haven’t said either Garcilaso lacked notability, only that your proposal is cumbersome. The treatment of two notable subjects of the same name can use their primary roles, but is more likely to use a natural disambiguator, such as (in this case) a nickname. So two pages (one disambiguated with a commonly–used nickname, with hatnotes linking the one to the other) is less cumbersome than three pages (one a dab page and the others distinguished only by a job description) and to proceed with a move we should really have a reason why the latter is better. Moonraker12 (talk) 23:57, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Moonraker, the definite article argument still makes no sense. Adding "the" to what may be considered a racist term does not make it any less racist. From my perspective, I still do not see the title "Inca Garcilaso" as racist, but I understood and adapted (based on the suggestion of Maunus) the proposed move to solve any unintended misinterpretations of racism or prevent giving greater weight to one Garcilaso over the other.
Other important people with similar names are also involved in this situation, including Garci Lasso de la Vega I and Garci Lasso de la Vega II (among others related to the House of Lasso de la Vega), so the dab page is a necessity, and having it be Garcilaso de la Vega is efficient. Regards.--MarshalN20 | Talk 05:01, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I don’t know how else to explain this definite article thing, but no, you haven’t got it. There is nothing racist about the name El Inca; but you made it so (whether you saw it or not) by omitting the definite article. Without the article it becomes demeaning. That’s English for you; I don’t know what the equivalent is in Spanish.
Also, if you need a disambiguation page for these other Garci Lasso’s you’ve found, that might affect the Spanish Garcilaso’s page (though you could as easily make a “GdlV (disambiguation)” page); you still haven’t said why this page must change. Moonraker12 (talk) 00:24, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
To answer your last point, for one thing prominent authors use it to identify the man (including Louis Baudin [4] and James Lockhart [5]).
The need for it to change again goes back to the possible problem of racism in the term (please show me examples of other articles that have this definite article thing with a nickname), and also because it better matches the separation-by-profession used in both cases (one the poet, the other the chronicler).--MarshalN20 | Talk 01:03, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
You missed Encyclopaedia Britannica. OTOH Google Books has more than 90,000 entries for him under the curent name. Quality v quantity?
And I’ve already given you examples, above, but; “possible racism”? Are you saying now that the current format is racist? What kind of a twist is that?
But I think we are not persuading each other, so perhaps we should stop bickering and let the closing admin decide, hey? Moonraker12 (talk) 13:13, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Encyclopedia Britannica ([6]) does not use the nickname "El Inca" in the title. What would be strong from your part, and what would convince me as well, is if you could please provide an example from Wikipedia that demonstrates it is common to use a person's nickname in the title. For instance, let us imagine two other famous Babe Ruth come up in the future (a basketball player and a football player). Would we differentiate the players, assuming they are of equal fame, by having the original Babe Ruth as "Babe Ruth (The Bambino)" and the others on their profession?--MarshalN20 | Talk 13:52, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 21 October 2015[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved. The consensus is that, as the common name of "Garcilaso de la Vega" is unavailable due to ambiguity, the natural disambiguation of "Inca Garcilaso de la Vega" is preferable to "Garcilaso de la Vega (chronicler)". Jenks24 (talk) 00:19, 15 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]


Garcilaso de la Vega (chronicler) → Inca Garcilaso de la Vega – For starters this title is simply more recognizable than the current one: this person was and is widely known as "The Inca"/"El Inca" rather than as "chronicler". As such it should also fit the spirit of WP:COMMONNAME. Additionally, the proposed title is WP:NATURALDIS, which is generally preferable to a title with a parentheses, especially when that parentheses is less clear.
In previous discussions it was argued above that "Inca Garcilaso..." is offensive, but this doesn't seem to be true. It's actually how the subject signed his name: See p. 22 here. The name is used without caveat in a wide array of English-language sources referring to the subject:[7][8][9][10][11][12] In fact, it's so common that it's usually only avoided when context already provides "The Inca", for instance when speaking of "The Florida of The Inca by Garcilaso de la Vega" or "Garcilaso de la Vega and La Florida del Inca". In general it seems like a clearer, more accurate, and more common way of referring to the subject. Cúchullain t/c 21:38, 21 October 2015 (UTC) Relisted. Jenks24 (talk) 12:51, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • Oppose - Based on prior requested move discussions. This is an interesting case. "Garcilaso de la Vega" is not his original name (it's a name that he was allowed to assume by the Spanish Crown), and "El Inca" is a nickname (and the racial undertone is real). Sources use both names interchangeably; I think we have already figured out a smart way to set him apart from other similarly named individuals (labeling him a chronicler).--MarshalN20 Talk 03:04, 22 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
My issue with that is that "chronicler" is necessarily less distinctive and unambiguous for readers than the "Inca" moniker, which is known to anyone with any familiarity of the subject. That was certainly the case for me, and I already knew about him. The ethnic element is there because de la Vega had Inca roots and was proud of it. He called himself "Inca Garcilaso de la Vega" because he wanted everyone to know; I've never heard anyone say it had negative connotations except for here.--Cúchullain t/c 14:14, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the explanation. I'd like to point out to an Ngram viewer for further analysis ([13]). We see there that "Garcilaso de la Vega" is a much more common term. The natural problem is with the names (particularly with the Poet Garcilaso); however, here we already have a solution with the parenthetical word "chronicler". This is why I don't think that a move is necessary now.--MarshalN20 Talk 19:57, 23 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. This seems fairly obvious. "Inca Garcilaso de la Vega" is a name by which he is widely known, so that is what our guidelines and policies say we should use. The only usage of "Garcilaso de la Vega (chronicler)" is here on Wikipedia and on Wikipedia mirrors. It is not a natural name, and is not one a reader would think to put in as a search. Our naming policy: Wikipedia:Article titles is fairly clear on this in terms of Recognizability, Naturalness, and Precision. Inca Garcilaso de la Vega is a WP:COMMONNAME, it is a WP:PRECISE name, and it is a WP:NATURAL name. SilkTork ✔Tea time 22:04, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I don't consider the parenthesis as part of the name. A similar situation occurs with Carlos Zambrano, who "shares" the name with two other notable individuals (a boxer and a footballer). The point being that the name "Carlos Zambrano" is what is common; the same occurs with the name "Garcilaso de la Vega" (as shown in the Google Ngram).--MarshalN20 Talk 23:30, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"I don't consider the parenthesis as part of the name". Exactly. And nor does anyone else, but that's the title of the article, and that's the search term someone would have to put in to find it if they didn't want to land elsewhere. "Inca Garcilaso de la Vega" is the name by which the subject is known, so is and would be a common search term - indeed, looking at the stats, over a quarter of the readers who are looking for this article use that search term. All the other language Wikipedias use a variation of Garcilaso de la Vega El Inca - none of them use "(chronicler)" or any variation of that. SilkTork ✔Tea time 23:51, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
"over a quarter of the readers who are looking for this article use that search term" - actually, there are some links into the article which use the term, so the stats might be misleading. SilkTork ✔Tea time 23:53, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
There's also Carlos Zambrano (boxer) and Carlos Zambrano (footballer). It's standard to have the parenthesis in cases where names are shared between notable individuals. That's what I meant by "I don't consider the parenthesis as part of the name." In my view, the name in question here is simply "Garcilaso de la Vega". The Ngram shows this to be the most common ([14]).--MarshalN20 Talk 00:28, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
When available, WP:NATURALDISAMBIGUATION is preferable to using a parentheses according to WP:AT, even if it's somewhat less common than the "preferred-but-ambiguous title". Put another way, "Inca Garcilaso de la Vega" is much more common than the constructed title "Garcilaso de la Vega (chronicler)".--Cúchullain t/c 14:33, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Inca Garcilaso de la Vega. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:50, 26 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

First mestizo?[edit]

Despite the source cited, I find it incredible that there was no other child born in the Americas with a Spanish father and a native mother before 1539. - Donald Albury 19:13, 5 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It seems to me that this is not a matter of whether or not there were prior children of Spanish and Amerindian descent prior to Garcilaso de la Vega, which obviously occurred prior to this person's birth. Rather, referring to Garcilaso as the "first Mestizo" refers to him as the first notable individual who intellectually embodied "being mestizo" or "mestizo thought" through his writing.--MarshalN20 ✉🕊 10:24, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps this source would be helpful. - Donald Albury 14:27, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
[15] Sigh! - Donald Albury 21:50, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"The Inca" listed at Redirects for discussion[edit]

The redirect The Inca has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 January 22 § The Inca until a consensus is reached. BDD (talk) 15:28, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Inca_Garcilaso_de_la_Vega&oldid=1197952872"