Talk:Francisco de Orellana

Xena in Brazil?

Since it's not cited I can't tell if this was part of a larger quote or what, but the lines: "There they entered the territory of the Amazons. A skirmish with these warrior women allegedly occurred on 24 June 1542" raise some eyebrows. What warrior women? Classical Amazons are a Grecian-Roman invention and their page makes no reference to any South American tribes. I understand there is some confusion due to the name but can anyone shed some light on this? Himeyuri (talk) 12:35, 15 September 2011 (UTC) kirt bour nun everting birt heve traquin babuque sunguana, refron pier naguti hana, trafun carapana ucunaran urucaka munhara.

The Amazons were legendary fighting women; Orellana came across fighting women, and referred to them as Amazons, from the legends. In the same way as as disorderly people are referred to as hooligans, purportedly from a family with that name or a similar one. Pol098 (talk) 15:25, 29 August 2020 (UTC)

Untitled

He really named the Amazon River and was exploring for the country, spain. His name has a tick to it that you will not forget.

Huh? Bastie 00:50, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

As his desendant I feel you should give more info about him. Have you guys seen the Spanish page of him? It is several times longer and I feel we should translate from it

I THINK THAT: that is a great idea.Awesomeness.Great idea,you're really tyte.

Essential information

Bushhopper, I have returned the sentence "He was one of Gonzalo Pizarro's lieutenants during his 1541 expedition east of Quito into the South American interior in search of El Dorado and the Country of the Cinnamon" to section "Explorations" from the first lines, because I think it is not the most essential information, as "He completed the first known navigation through the length of the Amazon River" actually is. Do you agree?

By the way, I am editing the article because I have just seen last Indiana Jones' movie, you too? ;) Tradewater (talk) 10:02, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Disappearance?

The article List of people who disappeared mysteriously, lists him as having "disappeared while exploring the Amazon in November. His fate remains a mystery." This article purports to know his fate. Which is correct?--Auric (talk) 11:47, 30 April 2012 (UTC)

Exaggerations?

The text in the article, at the start of the section on his second expedition, currently tells of Orellana telling the king's court "stories and exaggerations" about his first expedition. Is this really an appropriate wording? The wording immediately encourages readers to assume that Orellana made up some or maybe much of what he saw, and therefore that his testimony was unreliable. This very article makes note though of the fact that recent archaeological findings seem to support some of his rejected claims of finding a large and prosperous population in the Amazon, which is then assumed to have suffered catastrophic epidemic from new pathogens. If the "exaggeration" assertion is referring to Orellana's claims about the population and culture he found, then it should likely be reworded to allow for the possibility of his reports being legitimately accurate; if it's referring to something else, perhaps some clarification is in order to explain just what was supposedly exaggerated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.32.145.62 (talk) 22:28, 21 February 2015 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Francisco de Orellana Amazon River voyage (1541-1542).svg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 12:55, 23 January 2023 (UTC)