Battle of Diu and 2000s Name Problem: Difference between pages
(Difference between pages)
Content deleted Content added
OregonD00d (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
|||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
The decade of 2000-2009, unlike the decades from the [[1920s]] to the [[1990s]], which are called "The Twenties", "The Thirties", "the Forties" and so on, the decade of 2000-2009 has no name because people aren't sure what to call it. <ref>http://www.slate.com/id/2111435/</ref> |
|||
{{unreferenced|date=October 2008}} |
|||
{{Expand|date=October 2008}} |
|||
{{Cleanup|date=October 2008}} |
|||
{| class="toccolours" border="1" cellpadding="4" style="width: 300px; float: right; margin: 0 0 1em 1em; border-collapse: collapse;" |
|||
|- |
|||
!colspan="2" style="text-align: center; background:#B0C4DE"|Battle of Diu |
|||
|- |
|||
| colspan="2" |'''Conflict''': [[Al-Ashraf Qansuh al-Ghawri|Portuguese-Mamluk War]] |
|||
|- |
|||
| colspan="2" |'''Date''': [[February 3]], [[1509]] |
|||
|- |
|||
| colspan="2" |'''Place''': [[Diu]], [[India]] |
|||
|- |
|||
| colspan="2" |'''Outcome''': [[Portugal|Portuguese]] victory |
|||
|- |
|||
!colspan="2" style="text-align: center; background:#B0C4DE"|Combatants |
|||
|- |
|||
|[[Image:Flag Portugal (1495).svg|35px]][[Kingdom of Portugal]] |
|||
|[[Image:Mameluke Flag.svg|25px]] [[Mamluk|Mamlûk Sultanate]]<br>[[Saamoothiri|Zamorin Raja]]<br>[[Mahmud Begada|Sultan of Gujarat]] |
|||
|- |
|||
!colspan="2" style="text-align: center; background:#B0C4DE"|Commanders |
|||
|- |
|||
|width="50%"| Viceroy [[Francisco de Almeida|Dom Francisco de Almeida]] |
|||
|width="50%"| Amir Husain [[Kurdish|Al-Kurdi]]</br>Malik El Isa</br>[[Saamoothiri|Zamorin]] of Calicut |
|||
|- |
|||
!colspan="2" style="text-align: center; background:#B0C4DE"|Strength |
|||
|- |
|||
|width="50%"| 18 ships, 12 major vessels |
|||
|width="50%"| 12 ships, 4 major vessels |
|||
|- |
|||
!colspan="2" style="text-align: center; background:#B0C4DE"|Casualties |
|||
|- |
|||
|width="50%"| Unknown |
|||
|width="50%"| Unknown |
|||
|} |
|||
==Why the problem started== |
|||
The naval '''Battle of Diu''' was a critical sea battle that took place on 2–[[February 3]], [[1509]] near the port town of [[Diu]], [[India]] {{coord|20|N|71|E}}, between [[Portugal]] and a joint fleet of the [[Burji dynasty|Mamlûk Burji Sultanate of Egypt]], the [[Saamoothiri|Zamorin]] of [[Kozhikode|Calicut]] and the [[Mahmud Begada|Sultan of Gujarat]], with only technical maritime support from the [[Republic of Venice]] and the [[Republic of Ragusa]] (Dubrovnik).{{ref|rogers}} It is also referred to sometimes as the Second Battle of Chaul (Refer section below on precursor to battle). |
|||
The reason the current decade has no accepted name is because while [[1970]], [[1980]], and [[1990]] for example logically started a decade of an obvious name, the year [[2000]] did not. |
|||
This battle is critical from a strategic perspective since it marks the beginning of the dominance of the [[Europeans]] in the [[Asian]] naval theater. It also marks the spillover of the [[Christian]]-[[Islamic]] power struggle in [[Europe]] and the [[Middle East]], into the [[Indian Ocean]] which was a dominant arena of international trade at that time. The battle set the stage for domination of trade in the [[Indian Ocean]] by the [[Portuguese]] for the next century, and thus greatly assisted the growth of the [[Portuguese Empire]]. |
|||
To make the problem worse, the celebrations of [[1999]] celebrated the new millennium and century, which didn't technically start until [[2001]], ignoring the fact that [[2000]] also meant the end of the [[1990s]]. |
|||
== Background == |
|||
The [[Portuguese]] followed this battle by rapidly capturing key ports/coastal areas around the [[Indian Ocean]] like [[Mombasa]], [[Socotra]], [[Muscat, Oman|Muscat]], [[Ormus|Ormuz]], [[Goa]], [[Sri Lanka|Ceylon]] and [[Melaka|Malacca]]. This allowed them to circumvent the traditional spice route controlled by the [[Arab]]s and the [[Republic of Venice|Venetians]], and by routing the trade down the [[Cape of Good Hope]], they also simultaneously crippled the [[Mamluk Sultanate]] of [[Egypt]] and the of [[Gujarat Sultanate]]. The [[Portuguese]] sea monopoly lasted until the advent of the [[British East India Company]] and the [[Battle of Swally]] in [[1612]]. |
|||
[[Image:Diu Map.gif|200px|left|thumb|Portuguese presence in Indian Ocean around early 16th century]] |
|||
To many people, the [[2000s]] is not a decade the same way the decades of the [[20th century]] were - it's just a part of the [[21st century]], and the years after the [[1990s]]. |
|||
The [[Zamorin|Samoothiri Raja (anglicised to Zamorin)]], was incensed at the [[Portuguese]] because of their conduct since [[Vasco da Gama]] had landed in his kingdom in [[1498]], and hence had joined forces with the [[Sultan]] of [[Gujarat]]. |
|||
==Suggested names and their pros and cons== |
|||
The Egyptian fleet,was sent by the [[Mamluk]] Sultan , [[Al-Ashraf Qansuh al-Ghawri]] , in [[1507]] to support, the then [[Muslim]] Sultan of Gujarat, [[Mahmud Begada]]. |
|||
The most common names for the decade of [[2000]]-[[2009]] are the "Two Thousands", which is confusing because it can end in [[2009]], [[2099]] or [[2999]], and the [[Naughties]], popularized by the [[BBC]] <ref>http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/606/A41988405 BBC uses "naughties"</ref> because they sound like the words "Naughty" (a humorous reason), "Nineties" (to sound like the past decade which the [[2000s]] is culturally almost the same as), and most importantly "Naught", or "zero", as the 2000s is the "zeroes". |
|||
===Precursor to the battle=== |
|||
Diu was a critical outpost in the overall spice trade from India. The Mamluks along with the Venetians controlled the flow of spice from [[India]] to [[Europe]] in a symbiotic relationship. The [[Portuguese]] attempt to establish trade with [[India]] was to break this stronghold. The King of Portugal, [[Manuel I of Portugal|Manuel I]] fresh from [[Vasco da Gama]]'s exploits, sent out his first Viceroy, [[Francisco de Almeida|Dom Francisco de Almeida]] in [[1505]] with twenty-one ships to strengthen the fledgling Portuguese empire in East Africa and India. |
|||
As there is no official name for the 2000s, many other names exist. |
|||
The new Mamluk fleet set out for [[India]] in [[1507]], first fortifying [[Jeddah]] against a possible [[Portuguese]] attack. It then passed through [[Aden]] at the tip of the [[Red Sea]], where it received support from the [[Tahirid]] sultan, and then, in [[1508]], crossed the [[Indian Ocean]] to the port of [[Diu]].{{ref|palmira}} |
|||
==A 2010 Conclusion?== |
|||
In addition to enforcing Portuguese rule, the battle was undertaken to also avenge the defeat at the first [[Chaul|Battle of Chaul]] in March [[1508]], where Dom [[Lourenço de Almeida]], son of the Viceroy was killed. The Viceroy was so enraged at this death that he is supposed to have said, "He who ate the chick has also to eat the rooster, or pay for it". |
|||
The 2000s' identity as a decade may lie in how the [[2010 New Year]] is marketed. If the year is pronounced "twenty-ten" and not "two-thousand ten", the term "Two Thousands" may come to be understood only as the decade of 2000 to 2009. |
|||
At that battle the recently arrived [[Egyptian]] fleet, along with the fleet from the [[Sultan]] of [[Gujarat]], had surprised the [[Portuguese]] fleet over three days of combat. The Egyptian fleet isolated his ship, but let the others escape, taking nine captives back to [[Diu]]. The ''Mirat Sikandari'', a [[Persian literature|Persian]] account of the Kingdom of Gujarat details this battle as a minor infraction.{{ref|Bayley}} |
|||
How much [[Times Square]] emphasizes the fact [[2010]] is the beginning of a new decade will also affect people's view of the [[2000s]], and what they'll be called. |
|||
The [[Viceroy]] was forced to chase the Egyptian fleet to avenge his son's death, because soon on [[December 6]],[[1508]] his replacement, the next Viceroy, [[Afonso de Albuquerque]], arrived with orders from the King of Portugal to replace him. |
|||
As there is money to be made in a new decade, it is likely the fact will be strongly emphasized in [[2009]]. |
|||
==Battle== |
|||
==See Also== |
|||
===Mamluk Egyptian-Gujarat Fleet === |
|||
{{unreferenced|date=October 2008}} |
|||
*[[2000s]] |
|||
===Portuguese ships=== |
|||
*[[Y2K]] |
|||
* Five large ''[[carrack|naus]]'': ''Flor do Mar'' (Viceroy's flagship), ''Espírito Santo'' ([[captain]] Nuno Vaz Pereira), ''Belém'' (Jorge de Melo Pereira), ''Great King'' (Francisco de Távora), and ''Great Taforea'' ([[Ferdinand Magellan|Fernão de Magalhães]]) |
|||
*[[2010]] |
|||
* Four smaller ''naus'': ''Small Taforea'' (Garcia de Sousa), ''Santo António'' (Martim Coelho), ''Small King'' (Manuel Teles Barreto) and ''Andorinho'' (Dom António de Noronha) |
|||
* Four ''[[caravel]]as redondas'': (captains António do Campo, Pero Cão, Filipe Rodrigues and Rui Soares) |
|||
* Two ''caravelas Latinas'': (captains Álvaro Peçanha and Luís Preto) |
|||
* Two ''gales'': (captains Paio Rodrigues de Sousa and Diogo Pires de Miranda) |
|||
* One ''bergantim'': (captain Simão Martins) |
|||
{{reflist}} |
|||
The Portuguese had eighteen ships commanded by the Viceroy, with about 1,500 Portuguese soldiers and 400 natives from [[Cochin]]. The Allied side had one hundred ships, but only twelve were major vessels; the rest were small shallow-draught craft.After detecting the [[Portuguese]], who approached from Cochin to the south, and fearing their technical superiority, the [[Egyptians]] decided to take advantage of the port of [[Daman and Diu#Diu|Diu]] and its fort, which had its own artillery. It was therefore decided to stay anchored at this port and await an attack from the Portuguese. This may also have been due to the training of the [[Egyptians]], who were used to the more sheltered bays in the [[Mediterranean]]. There they also relied upon land-based [[artillery]] reinforcements to defeat the enemy.The Portuguese started the battle with a massive naval bombardment using their on board artillery, followed by hand-to-hand combat in the [[harbor]] of [[Diu]]. |
|||
[[Category:2000s]] |
|||
These Portuguese ships had guns of greater caliber, better [[artillery]] crews, and were better manned and better built. The Portuguese [[naval infantry]] also had an advantage over the [[Egyptians]], not only because they were heavily armed and equipped (armor, [[arquebus]]es and a type of grenade made of clay with gunpowder inside), but also because they were seasoned professional seamen. |
|||
[[Category:21st century]] |
|||
The tough state-of-the art multi-rigged Portuguese [[carrack]]s and the fast [[caravels]] were built to weather the storms of the [[Atlantic Ocean]], had a stern rudder, compass, and were bristling with cannon to port and starboard as well as fore and aft. The Indian Ocean [[dhow]]s and Mediterranean-type [[galley]]s launched by the coalition of the [[Zamorin|Samoothiri Raja]], [[Gujarat]] and [[Egypt]] were inadequate. The Portuguese ships were able to shoot their cannons and thus dissuade the smaller craft from coming near them. Even when they did come near, the smaller craft would have been low in the water, and so unable to board the [[Portuguese]] ships while being sprayed with small arms and cannon. |
|||
==Aftermath== |
|||
The spoils of the battle also included three royal flags of the Mamlûk Sultan of Cairo, that were sent to Portugal and are even today displayed in the [[Convento de Cristo]], in the town of [[Tomar]], spiritual home of the [[Knights Templar]].The Viceroy extracted a payment of 300,000 gold xerafins, but rejected the offer of the city of [[Diu]] which he thought would be expensive to maintain, although he left a garrison there. The prisoners from the battle of Chaul were also rescued.The treatment of the [[Egyptian]] captives by the [[Portuguese]] was brutal. The Viceroy ordered most of them to be hanged, burnt alive or torn to pieces by tying them to the mouths of the cannons, in retaliation for his son's death. Commenting on the battle after winning it, Francisco de Almeida said: "As long as you may be powerful at sea, you will hold India as yours; and if you do not possess this power, little will avail you a fortress on the shore."{{ref|ghosh}}Interestingly, after handing over the Viceroy's post to his successor, Dom [[Afonso de Albuquerque]], Dom [[Francisco de Almeida]] left for [[Portugal]] in November, [[1509]], and in December, [[1509]] was himself killed by the [[Khoikhoi]] tribe, near the [[Cape of Good Hope]]. |
|||
==References== |
|||
* {{note|rogers}} Rogers, Clifford J. ''Readings on the Military Transformation of Early Modern Europe'', San Francisco:Westview Press, 1995, pp. 299-333 [http://www.angelfire.com/ga4/guilmartin.com/Revolution.html] |
|||
* {{note|palmira}} Brummett, Palmira.''Ottoman Seapower and Levantine Diplomacy in the Age of Discovery'', SUNY Press, New York, 1994, ISBN 0791417018 , pp. 35, 171,22 |
|||
* {{note|lusiadas}} de Camões, Luís. ''The Lusiadas'', 288pp, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2002, ISBN 0192801511, 254 |
|||
* {{note|Bayley}} Bayley, Edward C. ''The Local Muhammadan Dynasties: Gujarat'', London, 1886, 222 |
|||
* {{note|ghosh}} Ghosh, Amitav ''The Iman and the Indian: Prose Pieces'', Orient Longman, New Delhi, 2002, ISBN 8175300477, 377pp, 107 |
|||
* Monteiro, Cmdr. Saturnino ,''Batalhas e Combates da Marinha Portuguesa'', Vol. I, A.N.C., Library Sá da Costa Editor, Lisbon 2001 |
|||
* Kerr, Robert, ''General History and Collection of Voyages and Travels, arranged in a systematic order'', 1881, 14 vols.[http://www.columbia.edu/itc/mealac/pritchett/00generallinks/kerr/index.html#index At Project Gutenberg, Columbia University] |
|||
==Additional readings== |
|||
* Subrahmanyan, Sanjay. ''The Portuguese Empire in Asia, 1500-1700 - A Political and Economic History'', 384pp, Longmans, London, 1993, ISBN 0582050685 |
|||
* Brummett, Palmira.''Ottoman Seapower and Levantine Diplomacy in the Age of Discovery'', SUNY Press, New York, 1994, ISBN 0791417018 |
|||
* Kuzhippalli-Skaria, Mathew. ''Portuguese and the Sultanate of Gujarat, 1500-1573'', 263pp, Mittal Publishers & Distr., New Delhi, 1986, |
|||
==See also== |
|||
* [[Battle of Swally]] |
|||
[[Category:Naval battles involving Portugal|Diu 1509]] |
|||
[[Category:Naval battles involving the Ottoman Empire|Diu 1509]] |
|||
[[Category:Naval battles involving Gujarat|Diu 1509]] |
|||
[[Category:Naval battles involving Venice]] |
|||
[[Category:History of Croatia]] |
|||
[[Category:Battles involving Arab Egypt]] |
|||
[[Category:1509]] |
|||
[[ar:معركة ديو]] |
|||
[[es:Batalla de Diu]] |
|||
[[fr:Bataille de Diu]] |
|||
[[pl:Bitwa morska pod Diu]] |
|||
[[pt:Batalha de Diu]] |
|||
[[sv:Sjöslaget vid Diu]] |
|||
Revision as of 08:15, 11 October 2008
The decade of 2000-2009, unlike the decades from the 1920s to the 1990s, which are called "The Twenties", "The Thirties", "the Forties" and so on, the decade of 2000-2009 has no name because people aren't sure what to call it. [1]
Why the problem started
The reason the current decade has no accepted name is because while 1970, 1980, and 1990 for example logically started a decade of an obvious name, the year 2000 did not.
To make the problem worse, the celebrations of 1999 celebrated the new millennium and century, which didn't technically start until 2001, ignoring the fact that 2000 also meant the end of the 1990s.
To many people, the 2000s is not a decade the same way the decades of the 20th century were - it's just a part of the 21st century, and the years after the 1990s.
Suggested names and their pros and cons
The most common names for the decade of 2000-2009 are the "Two Thousands", which is confusing because it can end in 2009, 2099 or 2999, and the Naughties, popularized by the BBC [2] because they sound like the words "Naughty" (a humorous reason), "Nineties" (to sound like the past decade which the 2000s is culturally almost the same as), and most importantly "Naught", or "zero", as the 2000s is the "zeroes".
As there is no official name for the 2000s, many other names exist.
A 2010 Conclusion?
The 2000s' identity as a decade may lie in how the 2010 New Year is marketed. If the year is pronounced "twenty-ten" and not "two-thousand ten", the term "Two Thousands" may come to be understood only as the decade of 2000 to 2009.
How much Times Square emphasizes the fact 2010 is the beginning of a new decade will also affect people's view of the 2000s, and what they'll be called.
As there is money to be made in a new decade, it is likely the fact will be strongly emphasized in 2009.
See Also
- ^ http://www.slate.com/id/2111435/
- ^ http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/606/A41988405 BBC uses "naughties"