Talk:Siege of Castelnuovo

Assessment

Other than the two following items, this is a nice article. Grammar: The grammar needs to be cleaned up in a number of places. Citations: At the ends of two paragraphs there are sentences that lack citations. I know that seems picky, but the standard is that all text (except the intro) should be cited. Djmaschek (talk) 13:49, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Grammar and syntax corrections were made. I hope it wasn't too heavy-handed. You should check to make sure I didn't change the sense of what you wrote. Citations are OK. Since I made so many changes, I'm going to ask someone else to review grammar & style. Djmaschek (talk) 04:18, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Siege of Castelnuovo/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Gaius Claudius Nero (talk) 20:42, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

I will be reviewing this article soon to help clear some of the backup. It will be done either later today or tomorrow...--Gaius Claudius Nero (talk) 20:42, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Alright...

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Comments:

1. What is the "Old Tercio of Naples?" Perhaps a brief explanation would work here. What goes in the lead should be mentioned in the body so a quick mention would be necessary. If the body's "Tercio" is the same as the "Old Tercio of Naples," this should be clearly demonstrated at least once.
2. In the Mediterranean, a Christian offensive attempted to eliminate the danger of the great Turkish fleet the year 1535, when a strong armada under Don Álvaro de Bazán and Andrea Doria captured the port of Tunis, expelling Admiral Hayreddin Barbarossa from the waters of the Western Mediterranean. What do you mean by the "year 1535?"
3. Its forces consisted of 15 companies whose captains were Machín de Munguía, Álvaro de Mendoza, Pedro de Sotomayor, Juan Vizcaíno, Luis Cerón, Jaime de Masquefá, Luis de Haro, Sancho de Frías, Olivera, Silva, Cambrana, Alcocer, Cusán, Borgoñón and Lázaro de Coron. Is there anything significant about these men, besides the fact that they led the Tercio?
4. It was costly in lives, as the Ottomans employed both infantry and artillery at the same time to assault and bombard Castelnuovo, resulting in heavy casualties among the Ottomans themselves. Was the casualty rate due to friendly fire, Spanish defending, or both?
5. This isn't really necessary since Spanish is a well-known language, but is there any way you could find an English translation of the poem in the Aftermath section?

Overall, the article is already good. I hope that my suggestions are both good and easy to fix. I will place it on hold until everything is fixed. Feel free to leave any comments if you disagree with mine.--Gaius Claudius Nero (talk) 01:09, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

1. I'm trying to resolve the problem. The composition of the garrison seems a very complex affair. In any case, I should have written 'Old Tercio of Lombardy' instead 'Old Tercio of Naples'.
2. Sorry, it's a grammatical mistake. I should have put simply "in 1535".
3. Machín de Munguía had a prominent role in defending the town and was the subject of Barbarrossa's admiration and anger, but nothing else is known about the other soldiers.
4. Both, but my intention was to highlight the fact that the Ottoman artillery inflicted many casualties among their own ranks.
5. I'm looking for a good translation, but I have little hope of finding one.

Thank you for the review.--ElBufon (talk) 14:41, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

I got the composition of the Tercio. It was a mixture of various units. I've put "elements of various Spanish tercios" in the intro. The second problem has also been resolved. About the third, I think the names may be eliminated except Munguía. What do you think? --ElBufon (talk) 15:05, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

I think the names should stay so don't worry about deleting them if you can't find anything else. I'll add that the casualties came from friendly fire and Spanish defending. If you think it should be changed to something else, feel free to do so. Also, if you can't find an English translation of the poem, don't worry too much about it. As for now, I will pass the review. Well done! It was a very interesting article!--Gaius Claudius Nero (talk) 20:44, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

OK. Thank you very much.--ElBufon (talk) 05:52, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Ottoman army strength and fleet

According to the Ottoman archives of this campaign, which are valuable information.

The Ottoman empire alotted 12 million akche (20,000 gold ducats) for three months.

The fleet consisted of 82 standard war galleys, 58 heavy galleys, 11 light galleys and 4 ships for the transportation of cannons.

The total personal numbered 27,204 men, 22,538 of whom were oarsmen. The rest comprised the crew, Janissaries (2,958 men) and craftsmen.

The wages of the crew and craftsmen amounted to 8,418,880 akche, the cost of the biscuits and water barrels, 2,294,580 akche and the bonus distributed to Janissaries together with other miscellania to 201,411 akche.

Source = An economic and social history of the Ottoman Empire 1300-1600, Halil Inalcik, page 94, 1997.

So there were only 3,000 Janissaries, total men were 27,000 but most were not soldiers but sailors and galley rowers. There is also no information that the army suffered heavy casualties, so claiming phyrric victory seems wrong. Most of the article is also based upon several Spanish sources which obviously are glorifying the Spanish. The article also does not seem good or neutral it seems to consist of a cheap propaganda story glorifying Spanish troops. DragonTiger23 (talk) 15:16, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

Not neutral and sentences glorifying Spanish

Sentences glorifying Spanish commanders and soldiers by repeatedly calling them brave and praised

These terms were rejected by the Spanish commanding officer Francisco de Sarmiento and his captains even though they knew that the Holy League's fleet, defeated at the Battle of Preveza, could not relieve them

During the siege the Barbarossa's army suffered heavy losses due to the stubborn resistance of Sarmiento's men

The courage displayed by the Old Tercio of Naples, however, was praised and admired throughout Europe and was the subject of numerous poems and songs

Sentences describing Spanish commanders and troops repeatedly beating Ottomans.

Then it was beaten by Francisco de Sarmiento in person, who was waiting for a new attempt together with Captains Álvaro de Mendoza, Olivera and Juan Vizcaíno, and 600 soldiers. Three hundred Ottomans were killed during the battle, and another 30 captured.

The Spanish, meanwhile, undertook several sorties to obstruct the siege works. These raids inflicted many casualties, among them Agi, one of Barbarossa's favorite captains

Another sortie by a Spanish force of 800 men surprised several units of Janissaries who were attempting to storm the walls of Castlenuovo, killing most of them and leaving the field strewn with corpses. When Barbarossa was informed about the setback, he severely reprimanded his officers, as the losses of the Ottoman elite corps were difficult to replace. He gave orders forbidding skirmishes to avoid a repeat of the defeat.

Sentence describing Ottomans as main danger to Christianity. In 1538 the main danger to the Christianity in Europe was the expansion of the Ottoman Empire.

Sentences exaggerating Ottoman army strength and who is Ulamen? Castelnuevo by sea while the forces of the Ottoman governor of Bosnia, a Persian named Ulamen, would besiege the fortress by land in command of 30,000 soldiers

Sentences describing Ottomans so weak as to try bribe the brave Spanish with not possible amount of money.

Barbarossa added to his offer the incentive of giving each soldier 20 ducats 20 x 4,000 = 80,000 gold ducats So Barbarossa proposed to give 80,000 ducats to the Spanish while the entire 3 month Ottoman campaign had only cost 20,000 gold ducats.

Sentences in which Spanish commanders make brave speeches

Two squad corporals of Captain Vizcaino's company, Juan Alcaraz and Francisco de Tapia, managed to return to Naples and write their view of events many years later. They recorded the answer given to Barbarossa that "the Maestro de Campo consulted with all the captains, and the captains with his officers, and they decided that they preferred to die in service of God and His Majesty

Sentences describing Ottomans as being stupid and cruel by bombarding own troops It was costly in lives, as the Ottomans employed both infantry and artillery at the same time to assault and bombard Castelnuovo, resulting in heavy casualties among the Ottomans themselves due to both friendly fire and Spanish defending.

Sentences describing Ottomans losing 100 times more men than Spanish who are good Christians confessing while dying When the attack was resumed the next morning, Saint James Day, Bishop Jeremías remained with the soldiers, encouraging them and confessing those who were mortally wounded along the attacked perimeter. About 6,000 Ottoman soldiers were killed in the bloody assault, while the Spanish suffered only 50 killed; although the number of men who died from their wounds was probably large

Sentences describing small amount of Spanish attacking Ottoman camp and Ottomans fleeing in panic before them Encouraged by the successful defense, several Spanish soldiers decided to conduct a surprise raid on the Ottoman camp with the approval of Sarmiento. Thus, one morning, 600 men took the unprepared besiegers by surprise. In some places the assault could not be stopped, and panic spread among the Ottomans. Many troops broke and ran, including some Janissaries who fled throughout their own camp breaking down the tents, including that of Barbarossa. The Admiral's personal guard feared for the safety of its lord, and, ignoring his protests, took him to the galleys along with the standard of the Sultan

Sentences glorifying a Spanish commander The assault began at dawn and the battle lasted all day. Captain Machín of Munguía distinguished himself in the fight, leading the defenders with great courage

Sentences describing Spanish bravery by not giving up and again praising of Spanish comnmanders and having the weakness of Spanish revealed by Spanish deserters as Ottomans are not clever enough to realize that. By nightfall the remnants of the Spanish garrison retreated to the walls of the town with their wounded, leaving the ruined castle in Barbarossa's hands. The day was very costly in lives. Of the Spanish officers defending the castle only Captains Masquefá, Munguía, Haro and a corporal surnamed Galaz survived. The remainder had been killed in the battle. Among the very few survivors that the Ottomans captured, they found three deserters. These were immediately brought to Barbarossa and encouraged the Admiral to continue with the assaults, reporting that the Spanish had suffered heavy casualties, lacked gunpowder and shot, and were mostly injured and exhausted.

On 5 August a new attack was launched against the walls. Barbarossa, after the report of the Spanish deserters, was sure that he could soon capture Castelnuevo. All the Janissaries took part in the action, and the cavalry was ordered to dismount to join the general assault

Despite the overwhelming numerical superiority of the Ottoman troops, the Spanish defense was successful, as no more than a tower of the wall fell to the besiegers that day. Sarmiento ordered his sappers to prepare a mine to destroy the tower, but the attempt failed when an unexpected burst of the gunpowder killed the soldiers who were working in the mine. At dawn on the following day a heavy downpour ruined the matchlocks of the harquebuses, the few remaining pieces of artillery, and the last gunpowder. The fight was therefore sustained only with swords, pikes and knives, and the wounded Spanish soldiers were forced to take up arms and help defend the walls. Only the dying men remained in the hospital. Surprisingly, the few surviving Spanish managed to repel the assault.

Sentences glorifying a Spanish commander by praising his courage and not abondoning his men and making romantic speech The last and definitive attack took place the next morning. Francisco de Sarmiento, on horseback, was wounded in the face by three arrows, but he continued to encourage his men

Demolished by heavy gunfire, the ruins of the walls became indefensible. Sarmiento then ordered the 600 Spanish survivors to retreat. His idea consisted of defending a castle in the lower city where the civilian population of Castelnuovo had taken refuge. Although the withdrawal was made in perfect order and discipline, Sarmiento and his men found that the doors of the castle were walled at their arrival. Sarmiento was offered a rope to raise him to the walls, but refused and responded "Never God wants that I was saved and my companions were lost without me". After that he joined Machín de Munguía, Juan Vizcaíno and Sancho Frias to lead the last stand. Surrounded by the Ottoman army, the last Spanish soldiers fought back to back until none were able to fight. At the end of day, Castelnuovo was in Ottoman hands

Sentences describing Ottomans as having huge casualties which are impossible in reality Almost all of the Janissaries and 16,000 of other Ottoman units were killed in the assault. According to rumor, Turkish losses amounted to 37,000 dead.

Sentences describing a Spanish commander bravery and Ottomans cruelness to brave Spanish survivors Of the Spanish troops only 200 survived, most of them wounded. One of the prisoners was the Biscayan Captain Machín de Munguía. Barbarossa, upon learning this, offered Munguía freedom and a place in his army. The admiral greatly admired him for his actions in the battle of Preveza, where the Spaniard had successfully defended a sinking Venetian carrack against several Ottoman warships. Munguía refused to accept and was therefore beheaded on the spur of the admiral's galley. Half of the prisoners and all the clerics were also slaughtered to satisfy the Ottoman soldiers, who were angry at the great losses which they had suffered in capturing the city. The few survivors were taken as slaves to Constantinople. Twenty-five of them managed to escape from prison six years later and sailed to the port of Messina

Sentences describing this siege as a miracle heroic battle which became famous and song all over Europe while adding that Spanish enemies liked the defeat Despite the failure of Sarmiento to retain the fortress, Castelnuovo's defense was sung by numerous contemporaneous poets and praised all over Christian Europe. The Spanish soldiers who participated in the unequal engagement were compared with mythological and classical history heroes, being considered immortal due the magnitude of their feat. Only the enemies of Charles V, such as the Paduan humanist Sperone Speroni, rejoiced at the annihilation of the Tercio of Castelnuovo.

Sentences describing Ottomans losing the city 150 years later as a great victory for Venice. Castelnuovo remained in Ottoman hands for almost 150 years. It was recovered in 1687, during the Morean War, by the Venetian Captain-General at sea Girolamo Cornaro, who in alliance with Montenegrins under Vuceta Bogdanovic, won a great victory over the Turks near the town and put the fortress under Venetian rule. DragonTiger23 (talk) 16:23, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

References

(Phyrric) victory

The current edit war as to whether or not the infobox should describe the outcome as a victory or a Phyrric victory seems to hinge on the fact that this was a very costly victory. The string of references added in support of "Phyrric" certainly demonstrate it was a costly victory, but not that it was a ruinously costly one. It may be that the Ottomans could afford to lose thousands of men to secure one fortified place. Since none of the sources specify that the Ottoman victory was Phyrric, and none of the extensive support given actually states that the victory was ruinously costly, just that it was costly, I incline to think we should leave the word out. --Andreas Philopater (talk) 11:52, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with that too. The meaning of phyrric is that the winning side is unable to win the war in the end, which isn't the case here (by far btw). But after an editor told me that I'm "fixated on dictionary definitions" I'll leave this to anyone's else. Bertdrunk (talk) 17:02, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

Unless there is a source that explicitly states pyrrhic victory, we can not state pyrrhic victory. As it appears right now, the multiple sourcing appears to be synthesis. --Kansas Bear (talk) 17:13, 24 December 2016 (UTC)

I removed "phyrric" but left the sources, if someone could take a look. Bertdrunk (talk) 19:26, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Edited the Spanish officers' reply to Barbarossa

The original Spanish source says: ... el maestre de campo consultó con todos los capitanes, y los capitanes con sus oficiales, y resolvieron que querían morir en servicio de Dios y de S. M., y que viniesen quando quisieren. The sentence que viniesen quando quisieren literally translates into something like that they might come whenever they might see fit.. As the entire report is written in the past tense, so is this indirect sentence. However, at the time the captains would not have said que viniesen quando quisieren but rather que vengan cuando quieran in the present tense, which is into which tense I edited the quote. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.102.245.90 (talk) 10:17, 4 November 2021 (UTC)