Talk:Battle of Barawa/Archive 1

Archive 1

Ajuran

Ajuran won the war and I've provided English sources to back up my claim. You cannot use sources that aren't written in English on a English speaking Wiki forum which is unacceptable. Logoat (talk) 16:02, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

The sources which I provided, and even yours, "The History of the Portuguese, During the Reign of Emmanuel" page 286 disprove everything claimed in the article, as everyone can see.

Tristão da Cunha sought refuge in Socotra Island "after losing his men and ships"? "Fierce resistance by the local population and soldiers resulted in the failure of the Portuguese to permanently occupy the city"? And 762 Portuguese died against 183 Somalis? And where exactly does it say that? On the contrary, the sources say that the Portuguese attacked the city, sacked it while survivors watched "at a little distance", and left. Meanwhile the article is trying to pass a minor Portuguese attack as a great Somali victory which is pretty comical. But it's not a problem, I will edit the article using your own source then. Crenelator (talk) 21:47, 25 April 2018 (UTC)

why is it that several sources claim this was a somali victory and the article seems to draw its conclusions from just one biased portoguese source while many sources claim that the portoguese failed in their objective to take the city i think this should be included in the article.

However , fierce resistance by the local population and soldiers resulted in the failure of the Portuguese to permanently occupy the city.[4] The Ajurans would successfully defends it's territory from the Portuguese incursion that initially burnt and looted the city.[5] Tristão da Cunha was later severely wounded in the battle.[6]

no one is suggesting that this was a major ajuraan victory but it was a succesfull defense after the protoguese withdraw they reutrned to occupay the city, a battle often recorded as a ajuraan victory to be regarded as a protoguese victory is not only biased but a little eurocentric aswell — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sahasu (talk • contribs) 17:01, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

according to this source the ajuraans would succesfully defend its territory after the portoguese initially burn and looted the city https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=X1dDDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA60&dq=Ajuran+Imamate+Trist%C3%A3o+da+Cunha&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj1u47NltLfAhWjqHEKHSHsDn8Q6AEIKjAA#v=onepage&q=Ajuran%20Imamate%20Trist%C3%A3o%20da%20Cunha&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sahasu (talk • contribs) 17:25, 2 October 2019 (UTC)

Why is this a Portuguese victory

why is it that several sources claim this was a somali victory and the article seems to draw its conclusions from just one biased portoguese source while many sources claim that the portoguese failed in their objective to take the city i think this should be included in the article.

However , fierce resistance by the local population and soldiers resulted in the failure of the Portuguese to permanently occupy the city.[4] The Ajurans would successfully defends it's territory from the Portuguese incursion that initially burnt and looted the city.[5] Tristão da Cunha was later severely wounded in the battle.[6] no one is suggesting that this was a major ajuraan victory but it was a succesfull defense after the protoguese withdraw they reutrned to occupay the city, a battle often recorded as a ajuraan victory to be regarded as a protoguese victory is not only biased but a little eurocentric aswell

according to this source the ajuraans would succesfully defend its territory after the portoguese initially burn and looted the city https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=X1dDDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA60&dq=Ajuran+Imamate+Trist%C3%A3o+da+Cunha&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj1u47NltLfAhWjqHEKHSHsDn8Q6AEIKjAA#v=onepage&q=Ajuran%20Imamate%20Trist%C3%A3o%20da%20Cunha&f=false Sahasu (talk) 22:22, 2 October 2019 (UTC)