为什么强大的西班牙在英西战争（1585-1604）中被小小的英格兰所羞辱？
Why was mighty Spain humiliated by small England in the Anglo-Spanish War (1585–1604)?
译文简介
如果你只相信你们自己的宣传和用以建立你的国家的民族神话，这取决于你。
正文翻译
Why was mighty Spain humiliated by small England in the Anglo-Spanish War (1585–1604)?
为什么强大的西班牙在英西战争（1585-1604）中被小小的英格兰所羞辱？
评论翻译
很赞 ( 2 )
收藏
, knows Spanish
If you believe your own propaganda and national myths to build your nation it is up to you. Now go and read the terms of the Treaty of London 1604 and find out who won that war. I won’t tell you to read history as it was because that would be too much for you.
Terms
Spain renounces intentions to restore the Church of Rome in England.[14]
An end to English wartime disruption to Spanish trans-atlantic shipping and colonial expansion (article 6).[15][16]
The English Channel opened to Spanish shipping.
An end to English intervention in the Dutch Revolt (articles 4,5,7); England withdraws military and financial support to the Dutch rebels.
Ships of both countries, merchants or warships, could use the mainland sea ports of the other party for refit, shelter or buy provisions (article 10). Fleets of less than eight ships did not even have to ask for permission, which provided an extensive network of naval bases for the Spaniards in England to help their war against the Protestant Dutch.
The treaty restored the status quo ante bellum.[17][14] It amounted to an acknowledgement by Spain that its hopes of restoring Roman Catholicism in England were at an end and it had to recognise the Protestant monarchy in England. In return, England ended its financial and military support for the Dutch rebellion, ongoing since the Treaty of Nonsuch (1585), and had to end its wartime disruption of Spanish trans-Atlantic shipping and colonial expansion.
Ok, Spain did recognised England was a Protestant Monarchy. That was all.
如果你只相信你们自己的宣传和用以建立你的国家的民族神话，这取决于你。现在去读一下1604年《伦敦条约》的条款，看看到底是谁赢得了那场战争。我不会告诉你去阅读历史的原貌，因为那对你来说太过沉重。
条款：
·西班牙放弃在英国恢复罗马教廷的意图[14]。
·结束英国战时对西班牙跨大西洋航运和殖民扩张的干扰（第6条）[15][16] 。
·英吉利海峡向西班牙航运开放。
·结束英国对荷兰起义的干预（第4、5、7条）；英国撤回对荷兰叛军的军事和财政支持。
·两国的船只，无论是商人还是军舰，都可以使用对方的大陆海港进行改装、避难或购买补给（第10条）。少于8艘船的舰队甚至不需要申请许可，这为西班牙人在英国提供了一个广泛的海军基地网络，以帮助他们对荷兰新教的战争。
该条约恢复了战前状态。[17][14]条相当于西班牙承认，其在英格兰恢复罗马天主教的希望已经破灭，它必须承认英格兰的新教君主制。作为回报，英格兰结束了对荷兰叛乱的财政和军事支持，这种支持自《农叙条约》（1585年）以来一直在进行，并且必须结束对西班牙跨大西洋航运和殖民扩张的战时干扰。
好吧，西班牙确实承认了英国是一个新教君主国。这就是全部。
Yes, I have also wondered how the US were humiliated by Japan in WWII…
是的，我也想知道美国在二战中是如何被日本羞辱的...
“Ok, Spain did recognised England was a Protestant Monarchy. That was all.”
Not quite.
Recognition meant that Spain would no longer seek the active overthrow of England’s Protestant monarchy. Spain admitted defeat, a significant admission of failure.
"好吧，西班牙确实承认了英国是一个新教君主制国家。这就是全部。"
并非如此。
承认意味着西班牙将不再寻求积极推翻英格兰的新教君主制。西班牙承认失败，是对失败的重大承认。
You better read again the terms of the Treaty. This time all of them, slowly, in high voice and without crying.
你最好再读一遍条约的条款。这一次是全部，慢慢地，高声地，不要哭出声。
Spain negotiating and coming to terms with heretics? Sell outs i thought better of Spain
西班牙正在与异教徒进行谈判和达成协议？我还以为西班牙能做得“更好”呢
They also lost quite a few ships…
他们还损失了很多船。
You better count your English losses.
你最好也看看英国的损失
James I wanted peace, he was tempted once and allowed Sir Walter Raleigh out of prison to see if he could bring back treasure but failed. He was thrown back into prison and James I went ahead with a peace treaty. If you want peace your negotiating position is usually weaker. However, England gave up nothing given that it had no interest any longer in attacking Spanish shipping or wasting money sending troops to Flanders.
詹姆斯一世想要和平，他曾经受到过诱惑，允许沃尔特-罗利爵士出狱，看看他是否能带回宝藏，但没有成功。他被扔回了监狱，而詹姆斯一世则继续签订了和平条约。如果你主动想要和平，你的谈判地位通常会比较弱。然而，鉴于英国对攻击西班牙航运或浪费金钱向佛兰德斯派遣军队不再感兴趣，所以实际上它没有放弃什么。
That pirate, Walter Raleigh, lost his head in 1618 for attacking territories of the Hispanic Monarchy in peacetime. Had Elisabeth made the same with pirates as Drake and Hawkins, Spain and England could have avoided a war.
The terms of the Treaty of London are evident treason to Dutch Protestants that must have been very difficult to swallow. Let’s not forget then that England has no friends, only interests.
那个海盗沃尔特-罗利在1618年因为在和平时期攻击西班牙君主国的领土而丢了脑袋。如果伊丽莎白对德雷克和霍金斯那样的海盗做了同样的事（砍头），西班牙和英国就可以避免战争。
《伦敦条约》的条款对荷兰新教徒来说是明显的背叛，一定是很难咽下去的。所以我们不要忘记，英国没有朋友，只有利益。
Now you are showing your subjective view rather than being obxtive.
现在你正在展示你的主观观点而不是客观。
What do you mean by that? that the obxtive view is that it was “Sir” Walter Raleigh instead of the cruel pirate he was? He ordered to burn a Spanish town San José de Oruña destroying it to the ground and murdering the people living there including women and children, just for his convenience to offer her Queen Elisabeth a colony in Guyana. All the people of San José de Oruña were either decapitated or burned alive under his orders of extermination.
It was of poetic justice that the murderous and cruel pirate Raleigh was decapitated too in England under the demand of Spain.
你这话是什么意思？所谓的客观就是认为是沃尔特-罗利是个“爵士”，而不是个残忍的海盗？他下令烧毁西班牙城镇圣何塞-德-奥鲁尼亚，将其夷为平地，并杀害生活在那里的人们，包括妇女和儿童，只是为了便于他向伊丽莎白女王提供圭亚那的殖民地。在他的灭绝命令下，圣何塞-德奥鲁尼亚的所有居民不是被砍头就是被活活烧死。
在西班牙的要求下，凶残的海盗罗利终于在英国被斩首，这是一种值得传颂的正义。
I don't care what you call Raleigh. However your hate is pouring out for something 500 years ago. You are not being very obxtive. This was a time of absolute Monarchy. A country's whole position and interests would change over night when the Monarchy changed. So the only interests and friends a country had were based on the monarch who ruled. This applied just as much to Spain, France, etc. With Spain's wealth it had sacophants who sucked up to including unfortunately the Pope who regularly puts politics ahead of scxture.
我不关心你怎么称呼罗利。然而，你的仇恨是为了500年前的东西而倾泻而出。你不太客观。那是一个绝对君主制的时代。当君主制改变时，一个国家的整个地位和利益会在一夜之间改变。因此，一个国家唯一的利益和朋友是基于统治者的君主。这同样适用于西班牙、法国等。由于西班牙的财富，当时的它有一些崇拜者，不幸的是包括经常把政治放在经文之前的教皇。
It’s funny how the English regularly scorn the Catholic pope putting “…politics ahead of scxture.” when their own kings and queens are heads of the Anglican church.
真有意思。英国人经常蔑视天主教教皇，把"......政治置于圣经之上。"而他们自己的国王和女王却又是英国圣公会的首脑。
Unfortunately at that time politics played a large role. To a degree it still does. I have nothing against Roman Catholicism or Protestantism but any political plays should be thoroughly assessed as they usually have adverse results. I dislike American evangelicals for this too.
As for the Anglican Church it was always an umbrella for multiple denominations that all agreed to try to work together in a conciliatory fashion which is why it is in such a mess today. The Monarch was head of the church but in reality had very little to do with it. Henry VIII wanted the wealth owned by monasteries. Edward VI wanted the country to become Protestant due to his faith. Mary wanted to change the country back to Catholicism. Elizabeth I just wanted religious peace and a bulwark against Catholic sedition. James I pretty much left it alone but passed laws on withes, etc. that was based on his superstitions rather than his faith. After that the monarchy played a very small part, just like in the running of the country after William and Mary came to the throne. Politics usually had little to do with it outside of the monarch's faith and wish for security of the realm, Henry VIII was the only one who used it for private gain and that was due to his wish of a male heir over everything else and his need for money due to his mismanagement.
不幸的是，在那个时候，政治扮演了一个很大的角色。在某种程度上，现在仍然如此。我并不反对罗马天主教或新教，但任何政治游戏都应该被彻底评估，因为它们通常会产生不利的结果。因为这一点，我也不喜欢美国的福音派。
至于英国圣公会，它一直是多个教派的保护伞，这些教派都同意以和解的方式努力合作，这就是为什么它今天会陷入如此混乱的局面。君主是教会的首脑，但实际上与教会的关系不大。亨利八世想要修道院所拥有的财富。爱德华六世希望国家因他的信仰而成为新教徒。玛丽想把国家改回天主教。伊丽莎白一世只是想获得宗教上的和平，并成为反对天主教叛乱的堡垒。詹姆士一世对这方面几乎不闻不问，但却通过了关于巫师等的法律，这些法律是基于他的迷信而不是他的信仰。此后，君主制只发挥了很小的作用，就像威廉和玛丽登基后国家的管理一样。政治通常与君主的信仰和王国安全的愿望无关，亨利八世是唯一一个利用政治谋取私利的人，这是因为他希望有一个男性继承人而不是其他东西，以及他因管理不善而需要钱。
“We have never lost a war, we are the greatest nation ever” is certainly something that was transmitted well to the colonies…
"我们从未输过一场战争，我们是有史以来最伟大的国家"，这句话肯定有很好地传递给殖民地...
Nobody wins a war. It’s just endless suffering for the poor families who die for the rich families. Every developed nation is guilty of it.
The only ‘just’ war is a war with the sole purpose of protecting life and defending your land.
没有人能够赢得战争。这只是为富人家庭而死的穷人家庭的无尽痛苦。每一个发达国家都有这样的罪过。
唯一'公正'的战争是以保护生命和保卫自己的土地为唯一目的的战争。
I was just mocking how the Us (the colony) believe they have never lost a war and create all kinds of subterfuges on Vietnam or Afghanistan…
我只是在嘲笑美国（殖民地）如何相信他们从未输过战争，并在越南或阿富汗问题上各种吃瘪......
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
I see a lot of silly business when I read through these posts. And please forgive me if my response was to your post and not the original one.
I have to admit though that the vast majority of American people that I’ve met are friendly and decent.
it’s the same the world over. The minority make the loudest noise.
I find people in general to be mostly decent regardless of where they were born.
当我读完这些帖子时，我看到了很多愚蠢的事情。如果你以为我的回应是针对你的帖子而不是原来的帖子，请原谅我。
但我不得不承认，我所遇到的绝大多数美国人都是友好和体面的。
这在全世界都是一样的。少数人发出最响亮的声音。
我发现一般来说，人们大多是体面的，无论他们出生在哪里。
So Spain admitted that removing the protestant monarchy was a failure. And from 1604 Spain went into decline while England and the rebel scum in the Netherlands became more powerful than ever. I call that a massive strategic failure for Spain
所以说啊，西班牙承认取消英国的新教君主制是一个失败。而从1604年开始，西班牙进入了衰落期，而英国和荷兰的叛乱则变得比以前更强大。我称这是西班牙的一次大规模战略失败。
And what happened to Spain and England in the three hundred years that followed? One became the Empire upon which the Sun Never sets - what happened to the other one?
在随后的三百年里，西班牙和英国发生了什么？一个成为了日不落的帝国--另一个发生了什么？
Spain was the first Empire upon which the Sun Never sets. British were only second, in fact they copied that theme from the Hispanic Monarchy, as it was first said by King Felipe II of Spain. Then as all Empires they fall. Spanish Empire lasted for over 300 years and British Empire lasted about 150 years.
西班牙是第一个"日不落"帝国。英国只是第二个，事实上他们从西班牙君主制那里复制了这个说法，因为这是西班牙国王费利佩二世首先说的。然后，正如所有的帝国一样，它们都会衰落。西班牙帝国持续了300多年，大英帝国持续了大约150年。
British empire lasted for well over 150 years, more like 300 years. In which it managed to by far and away surpass that of the Spanish in terms of size and population.
大英帝国的持续了超过150年，更像是300年。在这期间，它在规模和人口方面都远远超过了西班牙。
The British Empire after the independence of the USA could not be considered an empire but mere small territorial possessions until late XVIII or early XIXth century, particularly after the independence of the USA. It did not last 300 years, otherwise it would be existing today and many decades more for it to last.
By population, yes it was the largest as it included India that had many hundreds of millions of people even if I am not sure if the British care for them at all as I have not seen in India the expected British colonial legacy in their cities other than New Delhi’s goverment premises built as late as just 100 years ago.
美国独立后的大英帝国不能被认为是一个帝国，而仅仅是一个小的领土属地，直到18世纪末或19世纪初，特别是在美国独立之后。它并没有持续300年，否则它今天就会存在，而且还会持续几十年。
按人口计算，它是最大的，因为它包括有数亿人口的印度，即使我不确定英国人是否关心他们，因为在印度，除了在100年前建成的新德里的政府大楼之外，我没有在他们的城市看到预期中的英国殖民主义遗产。
That’s completely untrue. It was certainly considered an empire with its colonies around the world including many in Africa, Canada, and India - far exceeding the size of Britain itself, multiple times in fact.
India has been hugely influenced by Britain through politics, laws, and through to the army itself. English is a national language of India.
这完全不符合事实。它当然被认为是一个帝国，它在世界各地的殖民地包括非洲、加拿大和印度的许多殖民地--远远超过英国本身的规模，事实上是很多倍。
印度在政治、法律和军队上受到英国的巨大影响。英语是印度的一种国家官方语言。
It,s incredible to see how propaganda still works in2021. Until 1640 Spain was the leading power. For 150 years Spain was the most dominant monarchy, although the empire last until the end of napoleónic wars. Then, after 1640, France supersede Spain. In the second half of the 18th century France and UK could be at the same level. And even during 18th spanish armada defetead UK,s Navy Many times (and in the other way around of course).UK only could be considered as the first power in the world during Xix century. During the xvi century english monarchy was a second level actor in Europe. Far from Spain, France or even far from the italian regions or the ottamn empire. What makes difference between UK and other european countries with glorious past like France, Spain or Italy is that england (and dutch) always had a good propaganda and in particular that nowadays we are still influenced, somehow, by this propaganda because the us móvies and pop culture consider itself as a continuation of the UK history.
令人难以置信的是，在2021年，宣传工作仍在发挥作用。直到1640年，西班牙都一直是领先的大国。150年来，西班牙是最有统治力的君主国，这个帝国一直持续到那不勒斯战争的结束。然后，1640年后，法国取代了西班牙。在18世纪下半叶，法国和英国可以说处于同一水平。即使在18世纪，西班牙的舰队也数次打败了英国的海军（当然也有相反的情况），英国只有在19世纪才能被认为是世界第一强国。在十六世纪，英国君主制只能算是欧洲二流水平。远不及西班牙、法国，甚至意大利地区或奥特曼帝国。英国和其他拥有辉煌历史的欧洲国家（如法国、西班牙或意大利）的不同之处在于，英国（和荷兰）一直有良好的宣传，特别是如今我们仍然受到这种宣传的影响，因为美国的媒体和流行文化认为自己是英国历史的延续。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
None of what you have said contradicts what I have said. U.K. was the dominant power in the 19th century and on the world stage perhaps a bit before then.
The Royal Navy was far and away better then it’s contemporaries
你所说的一切都与我所说的不矛盾。英国是19世纪的主导力量，在世界舞台上也许更早一些。
皇家海军远比它同时代的国家要好得多。
Jose please don’t confuse England, a middle ranking European country with the Great Britain and Northern Ireland, often shortened to Great Britain, which was at one time The worlds largest unitary authority. They are not the same geopolitical organisation.
Great Britain gloriously embraces the Celtic nations of these islands which England largely does not. ( my apologies to our Cornish cousins)
何塞，请不要把英格兰这个欧洲的中等规模的国家与大不列颠及北爱尔兰（通常简称为大不列颠）混为一谈，后者曾一度是世界上最大的单一制政府。它们不是同一个地缘政治组织。
大不列颠光荣地接纳了这些岛屿上的凯尔特民族，而英格兰基本上没有。(我向我们的康涅狄格表亲道歉)
No, certainly I do not confuse England with Great Britain. However, due to the long previous historical relation with England and its capital London, since the Kingdom of Castile and the Kingdom of Aragon, it is usual in Spain to denominate England and English to the whole of Great Britain and the British who have maintained the capital in London and speak English. Wrong as it is this Englishzation of Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, I try to not fall into the error. I also take note of the Celtic component of your claim.
不，我当然不会把英格兰和大不列颠混为一谈。然而，由于自卡斯蒂利亚王国和阿拉贡王国以来与英格兰及其首都伦敦的长期历史关系，在西班牙通常将英格兰和将首都保持在伦敦并讲英语的英国人都称为大不列颠。尽管这种对威尔士、苏格兰和北爱尔兰的盎格鲁化是错误的，但我尽量不陷入这种错误。我也注意到了你所说的凯尔特人的成分。
Actually, the Spanish Empire reaches its biggest extension during the second half of the XVIII Century. That was just before Britain stabbed its supposed allied Spain (and maybe even Portugal) in the back, getting sure the Napoleonic Wars on Iberian soil resulted in the biggest level of destruction while supporting revolts in America. Nice allies, you seem to be, yes.
实际上，西班牙帝国在十八世纪下半叶达到了最大的扩张。那是在英国对其所谓的盟友西班牙（甚至可能是葡萄牙）的背后捅了一刀，确保在伊比利亚土地上进行的拿破仑战争导致最大程度的破坏，同时支持美洲的叛乱之前。你们真是不错的盟友，是的。
Why do people respond to such ridiculous questions? Non of us were even born back then, we’re all friends these days although the Spanish are better at football and dancing and we make better rock bands
为什么人们会对如此荒谬的问题做出反应？我们甚至没有人在那时出生，我们现在都是朋友，尽管西班牙人在足球和舞蹈方面更出色，我们的摇滚乐队也更出色。
Not about what’s the current status. I know what is current status and the history of XIX and XX centuries. But the question is about XVI century. And in the XVI century , yes or yes and the history is there for study it, Spain ruled the world. And in the XVII and XVIII too. And England was an ongoing and growing power (but weaker than Spain) and Netherlands… Netherlands was nothing important. They were good commerciants and their naval power was built around that concept (in fact, british too) but it was a medium power. Never was a big power.
这与现状是什么样无关。我知道现状是什么样，也知道十九和二十世纪的历史。但问题是关于十六世纪的。在十六世纪，是的，西班牙统治了整个世界，这可以从历史研究中得知。而在十七和十八世纪也是如此。英国是一个持续增长的大国（但比西班牙弱），荷兰......荷兰并不重要。他们是很好的商人，他们的海军力量是围绕这个概念建立的（事实上，英国也是如此），但它是一个中等规模国家。从未成为一个大国。
Spain for 300 hundreds years was the country that dominated the world .Spain mixed with every culture not like anglo saxon culture that killed aborigins and then made films telling aborigins were demons
三百年来，西班牙是主宰世界的国家。西班牙与各种文化混合，而不是像盎格鲁撒克逊文化那样，杀害原住民，然后拍电影说原住民是恶魔。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Tell that to the Aztec’s and multiple other South American nations of the period. I’m sure they would disagree, if they could, but they mostly didn’t survived the brutal and ruthless religious and political oppression and exploitation by Spain. The Spanish nation was almost completely funded by South American plunder of gold and other precious minerals; that was the purpose of it’s Empire, not for some fanciful notion of peaceful congress with foreign peoples.
What did Spain import in return; the Spanish Inquisition, religious intolerance and a style of politics so dysfunctional it’s left it’s mark up to the present day.
I’m not defending the British Empire either, but I am countering you Rosie picture of a benign Spanish Empire. It was very far from that!
把这句话告诉阿兹特克人和当时的其他多个南美国家。我相信他们会不同意的，如果他们可以的话，但他们大多没有在西班牙残酷无情的宗教和政治压迫和剥削下生存下来。西班牙国家的资金几乎完全来自于对南美黄金和其他贵重矿物的掠夺；这是它建立帝国的目的，而不是为了与外国人民进行和平协商之类的一些幻想的概念。
作为回报，西班牙引进了什么？"西班牙宗教裁判所"、宗教不容忍和一种功能失调的政治风格，直到今天还留下了它的痕迹。
我也不是在为大英帝国辩护，但我是在反驳你对西班牙帝国良性发展的浪漫化描述。它实际上与此相去甚远。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Sorry mate, but Spain was indeed very benign to the indigenous populations in comparison to other European nations in America, Africa and Asia. What laws did England or Holland set out to protect the indigenous populations? What Cortés and his handful of men did was to liberate the many tribes that were subjugated by the brutal and ruthless cannibal Aztec yoke.
The inquisition did not judge indigenous populations it brought them a loving god, not one to whom to offer human sacrifices.
“they mostly didn’t survived the brutal and ruthless religious and political oppression”
Oh but they did survive; their descendants are the current inhabitants of Mexico, central and South America. From the very start the Spanish monarchy encouraged marriage with the Aztec and Incan monarchies…
…they are represented at the royal palace in Madrid.
Excepting Argentina and Chile, who were influenced by the English masons, to exterminate the indigenous populations, as they did in Australia and New Zealand, to clear the land for sheep and cattle herds.
“plunder of gold and other precious minerals” since when is the mining business a matter of plundering? So it’s ok to mine in Australia, that’s not plundering, that’s building a nation right?
Spain has had to suffer the most hideous and slanderous propaganda through centuries. It’s about time they start defending themselves from outright lies and deformations.
抱歉伙计，与殖民美洲、非洲和亚洲的其他欧洲国家相比，西班牙确实对原住民非常仁慈。英国或荷兰制定了什么法律来保护土著居民？科尔特斯和他的少数人所做的是解放被残忍无情的食人族阿兹特克人桎梏所征服的许多部落。
宗教裁判所并没有审判原住民，而是给他们带来了一个慈爱的神，而不是之前让他们提供人来做祭品。
"他们大多没有在残酷无情的宗教和政治压迫下生存下来"
哦，但他们确实活了下来；他们的后代是目前墨西哥、中美洲和南美洲的居民。从一开始，西班牙君主就鼓励与阿兹特克人和印加人的君主联姻......
...他们在马德里的王宫有代表。
阿根廷和智利除外，他们受到英国泥瓦匠的影响，要灭绝原住民，就像他们在澳大利亚和新西兰所做的那样，为牛羊群开垦土地。
"对黄金和其他贵重矿物的掠夺"，什么时候采矿业是掠夺的问题了？所以在澳大利亚采矿是可以的，那就不是掠夺，那是建国，对吗？
几个世纪以来，西班牙不得不承受最可怕的诽谤性宣传。现在是他们开始为自己辩护的时候了，以避免公然的谎言和畸形化。
Thanks for that answer. I am tired of these revisionists british thinking that there country were better at war. England/Britain always fought with a powerful coalition; and still failed most of the time; not like Spain, France Germany or Poland.
谢谢你的回答。我已经厌倦了这些修正主义的英国人认为他们的国家在战争中更有优势。英格兰/不列颠总是有一个强大的联盟与之并肩作战；而且在大多数时候仍然失败了；不像西班牙、法国、德国或波兰那样。