Talk:Battle of Guadalete
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Spain, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Spain on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale. |
| ??? | This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale. |
 |
Battle of Guadalete is part of WikiProject Portugal, a project to improve all Portugal-related articles. If you would like to help improve this and other Portugal-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome. |
|
Portugal To-do:
|
|
 |
This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions. | ||||||||||||||||
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. | ||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
Contents |
[edit] "Guadalete River", "La Janda Lake" or "Barbate River"?
It is uncertain whether the battle took place at the Guadalete river or at the La Janda lake, or even the Barbate River. There is not documentation at all on the event. So, it is usually said: either "Battle of Gaudalete" or "Battle of La Janda", and sometimes, though rarely, the "Battle of the Barbate River".
(Threshold 18:23, 24 December 2005 (UTC))
hmm... perhaps we should create Battle of La Janda as a seperate page that re-directs to Battle of Guadalete? Hiberniantears 14:48, August 2, 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Smaller figures
As with the "Battle of Covadonga" almost everything is unsure about this event. However the arguments of the hispanist Roger Collins are truly convincing, and, so, I second his opinion about the figures: None of the contingents of troops at Guadalete could have been too numerous for the reasons provided by him, which, in summary, are: 1) on the Muslim side, a large expedition would have demanded the presence of Musa ibn Nusair (no doubt about this, the governor should lead the conquest expeditions, under penalty of losing the power -Remember the punishment inflicted by Musa to Tarik later, and the subsequent intervention of the Caliph); 2) on the Visigoth side, King Roderic had been well informed about the size of the expedition and did not consider the situation as a real threat, althought he was finally surprised by the invaders' rather new tactics of combat.
(Threshold 18:23, 24 December 2005 (UTC))
[edit] Smaller figures again (let us be serious!)
Please don´t put here what you learnt at the primary school!! We heard many things like this as kids, but not even then we ever heard something so fantastic (40.000 visigoths!!, why not 400.000?), where did you get those figures. I recomend you to spend a few minutes reading Roger Collins (Early Medieval Spain. Unity and Diversity (400-1000). The McMillan Ltd. (London, 1983). There is a Spanish translation If you prefer.
I gather from your fantasy you also believe in the magical Clavijo Battle, don´t you?
Was Roger Collins present when the battle occured in 711 ?
It really is true that Roderic had an army of 40000 soldiers and the super military commander Tarik ibn Zyad had an army of 7000 men. I know this because Tarik ibn Zyad is my Ancestor and the story has been told (in our family) from generation to generation, so it is also part of MY History. I know more about this subject than Roger Collins. Was his Ancestor Tarik ibn Zyad ?
Wow!!!
- Are you lot being stupid or funny? We at Wikipedia don't base figures on people who claim to be the descendents of a long gone commander. Listen, we treat sources from one side as bias. To assume that the alledged descendant (who has no proof in any claims) of one side is reliable is to be extemely unacademic. Tourskin 00:06, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Tarik took troops from Morocco to Hispania?
Morocco in 711? Could you explain that? It seems a bit confusing!
[edit] TROOP NUMBERS
Please stop this edit war until it is hashed out on this talk page! If you are going to change the troop numbers, we need some more sources. Also, can anyone find a source for the image? It is up for deletion. Thanks... Hiberniantears 16:28, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
- Most on the Muslim invasion of the Iberian Peninsula comes from pure conjecture or, simply, from tales: background (Count Julian, a tale), main events (pre-Tarik exploration by Tarif, no historical trace at all) and, mainly, figures, usually inconsistent with demographic reality and political context. For all these stories, there are no verifiable sources at all. Troop numbers must be taken cautiosly and derived from those given by the closest written sources (if any) and strongly adjusted by historical background. Roger Collins followed this approach, so that his figures are pretty aceptable. Tarik expedition could not have been a big one, otherwise, according to Arabian customs, Musa, as the gorvernor, ought to have been the head; another indication in this direction was that the Caliph stood against the Tarik adventure and subsequent movement of Musa on the estrait. Consequently with the size of the invader, the Visigothic reaction would have been reduced, as Roderic was engaged in solving other (even personal) problems and because he was not in control of the whole peninsula. These are the facts. Definitely, both contingents below 2,000. (Threshold 17:17, 31 December 2005 (UTC))
I like what you're saying Threshold. Given that the total number of troops involved has changed continuously since the inception of this article, perhaps we should just leave the number of troops out, or give the high and low estimates, rather than attempting to settle on one particular figure... Thoughts? Hiberniantears 18:43, 31 December 2005 (UTC)
[edit] references for Yahnson Zsolte ?
Can someone add a reference for the paragraph on Yahnson Zsolte? This seems unusual (fantastic?) and would be strenthened by a reference. By the way, please sign your comments with the four tildes. Thanks Hu Gadarn 14:31, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Yes. Why were the Hungarians fighting on the same side as the Moors? How did the communicate? Tesint 22:04, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
- Impossible - Hungarian Magyars did not enter Europe until 9th century and did not advance beyond the Rhine or into the Mediterranean. They were repelled by the Holy Roman Empire and forced to settle in Hungary as their allies. Tourskin 01:43, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Edit Wars
I am going to change the troop numbers to "unknown". To assume that the Arabs had only 7,000 men is incrediably stupid because in a few years time the invasion of 732 in France had an expedition force of between 30,000 and 80,000 men and the 80,000 men figure was given by Muslim sources. This battle is not the only article suffering from extreme bias - the battles in the Byzantine-Arab Wars also mention ridiculous numbers.
If there were 80,000 men after this battle, then there must have been much more before because in any campaign, troop numbers naturally decrease due to disease and battle casualties. The Arab Armies at the time or any armies of any time do not ever include 7,000 Rambo's with guns beating thousands of "enemies". Tourskin 00:11, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
- But were there 80,000 men after this battle? Ancient historians more often overestimate than underestimate army strengths, see Delbrück's opening chapter in his series on military history (it should be in the first volume regardless of the edition). Jacob Haller 00:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Date of battle
The date July 19 only appears in pages that are obviously copypasta from this article. In other words, this is the only article on the internet that says July 19. I'm going to need to see a book citation in here by next week or I'll remove the date, kay? 70.75.0.221 (talk) 18:22, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
