Talk:La púrpura de la rosa

A fact from La púrpura de la rosa appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 9 September 2008, and was viewed approximately 1,142 times (disclaimer) (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that La púrpura de la rosa is the first known opera to be written in and performed in the Americas?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2008/September.

Wikipedia

Opera

This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Opera, a group writing and editing Wikipedia articles on operas, opera terminology, opera composers and librettists, singers, designers, directors and managers, companies and houses, publications and recordings. The project discussion page is a place to talk about issues and exchange ideas. New members are welcome!OperaWikipedia:WikiProject OperaTemplate:WikiProject OperaOpera articles

Spain Low‑importance

	Spain portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SpainWikipedia:WikiProject SpainTemplate:WikiProject SpainSpain articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The date of the first performance

The article gives 9 December but Philip's birthday was on the 19 December (unless that article is wrong!). Grove and Amadeus give 19 October. Do we have any more sources? --Klein zach 00:30, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest we go with what's in Grove unless someone comes up with a verifiable source for the December 9 date.Nrswanson (talk) 01:12, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK. But we still have the problem of why they did it 2 months before the birthday. An error by Stein? A wrong date for Philip V in WP? or a calendar thing? --Klein zach 02:59, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the date to 19 December and provided a reference.:

American Colonial Music: a sample of its documentary richness, Joint nomination submitted by Bolivia, Colombia, Mexico and Peru, Memory of the World Register, UNESCO, Ref N° 2006-35.

The October 19 date comes from the Amadeus online almanac, and is probably an error/misprint. I don't have access to the Grove, but that could also be an error/typo (9 instead of 19). Voceditenore (talk) 06:03, 5 September 2008 (UTC) OOOps, I missed the bit at the beginning of this conversation. I suspect the Grove date for October 19 is an error, frankly. It does happen. ;-) Why would it be performed two months before his birthday? It also doesn't jibe with the anniversary of his succession to throne, which it also celebrated (See frontispiece). Charles II of Spain died on 1 November 1700. Voceditenore (talk) 06:59, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Have done a bit more sleuthing. In Stein's 1999 introction to the critical edition of the score [1], she writes:

La púrpura de la rosa was commissioned by the Viceroy of Peru, Don Melchor Portocarrero Lasso de la Vega, Count of Monclova, to commemorate the eighteenth birthday of King Philip V (Philippe d'Anjou) and the first year of his reign (this we know from the title page of the Lima score). Philip was the grandson of Louis XIV and his first wife, María Teresa of Spain. He was proclaimed Philip V of Spain in Madrid on 24 November 1700, and in Lima on 5 October 1701. Though official accounts of his coronation and the local celebrations in his honor were published far and wide in the Hispanic lands, only one has survived from Lima. It may be that the Count of Monclova suppressed any official description or relación of the festivities of 19 October, the assumed performance date for La púrpura de la rosa. The anonymous text of the opera's 1701 Loa proclaims “¡Viva, Felipo, viva!” to voice Lima's acclamation of the first Bourbon king of Spain, in spite of the fact that the War of the Spanish Succession still raged. [Note 4].

Note 4] The anonymous Solemne proclamación y Cabalgata real que el día 5 de octubre de este año de 1701 hizo la muy noble ciudad de los Reyes ... (Lima: Joseph Contreras, 1701) [BNM R-5751] decribes in great detail the splendor with which Philip V was acclaimed in Lima, and defensively explains in detail how and when the viceroy received official notice of the change in dynasty.

Perhaps the article needs to actually expand on the presumed date of the first performance and the uncertainty surrounding it? Voceditenore (talk) 07:18, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

5,000th opera related article/DYK nomination

As this is our 5,000 article I thought a submission to DYK would be appropriate. I think we are going to have to do inline citations though in order for it to get approved.Nrswanson (talk) 02:16, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An interesting review

Here is an interesting review of a recent production of the opera. It gives some more information about the score and the surviving copies.Nrswanson (talk) 03:26, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Photo of the score frontispiece

There's a much clearer and larger version of the photo of the first page of the score here [2]. The full size is even bigger [3]. Perhaps we should substitute it? The public domain rationale would remain the same. The ultimate source of the photo and the documentation is here [4] Voceditenore (talk) 06:53, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on La púrpura de la rosa. 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: 5 June 2024).

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) 22:41, 23 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on La púrpura de la rosa. 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/20060716025948/http://www.dartmouth.edu/~hispanic/purpura.html to http://www.dartmouth.edu/~hispanic/purpura.html

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 02:34, 15 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]