Talk:Ottoman-Ethiopian war (1557-1589)

victory

@Havenzeye stop adding unsourced information to the infobox, there is no evidence that the Ottomans aspired to conquer all of Ethiopia. And the Abyssinians attempted to expel the Ottomans from Massawa on numerous occasions but ended in failure. This was not an Ethiopian victory at all محرر البوق (talk) 01:35, 12 June 2023 (UTC)

Ottoman Victory

@Socialwave597 Why are you removing the information in the infobox that states it was an Ottoman Victory? Multiple sources state that they were successful in establishing a presence over the entire Eritrean coastline and organising an Eylat for this conquest. Albeit the costs from the war with many soldiers succumbing to sickness due to the climate. Replayerr (talk) 12:11, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

@Replayerr Cite your sources. The Ottomans also tried to take all of Mereb Milash and Tigray, they had outposts as far as Agame and Tembien until they were defeated at the Battle of Addi Qorro. However their hold on the coastline remained unbroken and an Ethiopian siege on Hirgigo ended in failure. The sources instead say that this war ended in a stalemate between the Ottomans and the Ethiopians after they signed a peace treaty in 1589 [1] (pg 98). I could not find any sources stating it was an Ottoman victory, even if they did make some (minor) territorial gains. Socialwave597 (talk) 23:42, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Suleiman the Magnificent met with Ozdemir Pasha face to face in the gardens of Topkapi palace where he was presented with plans to capitalise the gains in Yemen by extending influence on Eritrea's Red Sea coastline.[2] By the end of 1577, he established full control over the Habesh(the Eritrean coastline) in the name of SuleimanThe creation of the province was followed with the victories of Ozdemir from 1559-1560 [3]

After fulfilling his objective of the initial plan, he looked to penetrate the interior which he ultimately failed to do because he succumbed to heatstroke.

The territorial gains weren't "minor" but caused Ethiopia to lose direct access to the sea and had strong effects on their communication outside of the nation which is why they heavily relied on Baylul(Dankali Sultanate's main port) as their point of trade.

Would you say that for the results of the war.

- Ottomans succeed in establishing control of the coastline( Partial Ottoman victory/success in Eritrea, military stalemate in Ethiopia).

- Ethiopia loses direct access to the sea, becoming landlocked. Replayerr (talk) 00:59, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Özdemir Pasha was indeed victorious in seizing the Red Sea coast from Ethiopia, but the Turks also aimed to conquer Ethiopia per[4] "Yishaq and the Turkish pasha perished on the battlefield. This victory terminated the last serious Ottoman attempt to conquer Ethiopia: not until the nineteenth century were the Muslim elements of the coast again in a position to threaten the Christian empire."

I would say that the Ottomans were victorious in conquering the coastline but were defeated attempting to conquer Ethiopia, or even the Christian highlands adjacent to the coastal lowlands such as Hamasien. Neither side achieved their main objectives, therefore I see no point in adding "Ottoman victory" or "Ethiopian victory" to the infobox, as it would make no sense, especially without sources explicitly stating so. Socialwave597 (talk) 03:22, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

So you agree that the Ottomans were victorious in conquering the coastline. Should I include this in the results as a partial success, Ethiopia becomes landlocked should also be included. Replayerr (talk) 13:04, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

The Ottomans did managed to conquer the coastline, however that was included in the infobox and was on there for quite some time now. Just leave the results as it is for reasons explained above. Socialwave597 (talk) 20:17, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Ethiopian Victory

@Glockerov Stop vandalising the article. They managed to conquer the coastline on the "mainland" and prevent access to the sea so Ethiopian Emperors pursued access through Baylul(port of the Dankali Sultanate). Replayerr (talk) 12:09, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

The sources you tried using on the infobox don't state a victory either. Replayerr (talk) 12:11, 12 December 2024 (UTC)

Casale explicitly mentions a crushing Ottoman defeat at the hands of the Emperor Sarsa Dengel at the Battle of Addi Qarro. That's an Ethiopian victory against the Ottomans further discussed in the article along with it's own article Battle of Addi Qarro. Glockerov (talk) 16:30, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

An additional source by J.S Trimmingham also explicitly states the lifting of the menace of the "Turkish conquest" with the Emperor's Victories against the Ottomans including Addi Qarro. Glockerov (talk) 17:03, 16 December 2024 (UTC)

The main objective of the Ottomans was to gain influence in the Red Sea's African coast (Eritrea).[5] The Turks were victorious in this venture by taking control of the area to curb Portuguese influence

This is mentioned by Giancarlo Casale:

Ozdemir had the unusual opportunity to meet face-to-face with the sultan in the private gardens of Topkapı Palace, where he presented a plan to capitalize on recent gains in Yemen by extending Ottoman influence along the Red Sea’s African coast as well. The sultan found Ozdemir’s case convincing, and before the year was out, he was on his way to Egypt with authorisation to raise an expeditionary force of several thousand men. (page 108)[6]

Ismael Ibrahim Mukhtar states:

"Nonetheless, the Ottomans were successful in driving the Portuguese out of the Red Sea and taking control of Massawa and its environs. The Ottoman victory not only ended the Portuguese potential threat to Islam in the region, but also brought parts of Eritrea under the influence of the Ottomans for centuries." [7] (page 86)

The sources you shared written by Trimingham say that the Emperor tried to siege Arkiko but had failed. After the battle of Addi Qorro, he signed a peace treaty to end such menace:

"The king returned and advanced against them, but the Turks retired into Arkiko and he decided to try and evict them once and for all from Abyssinia. He failed in this." (page 98)

"He accepted these and made peace, and from that time (1589) the menace of Turkish conquest was lifted" (page 98)

Giancarlo Casale also wrote that:

Over the course of the next year, Hizir Beg and Bayram Beg recaptured key positions on the Red Sea coast that had recently fallen to the Ethiopians, including the strategic port towns of Arkiko and Beylul. From there, in 1582, Hizir advanced into the interior with a sizable force of seven thousand troops, eventually recapturing the fallen city of Debarwa after a series of major victories in the highlands. To ensure the area’s future stability, Koja Sinan then had supplies sent from Egypt for the construction of a chain of seven new fortresses along the coast from Suakin to Massawa. (page 157)

This does not sound like a victory at all but the emperor conceding access to the sea, resulting in which having to find a third party (Dankali Sultanate) for port access to via Baylul. Your statement "Ethiopian victory on the mainland" is confusing as if Eritrea is an island. Eritrea and Ethiopia were apart of a contiguous territory known as Abyssinia(Al-Habash). Eritrea thus being apart of the mainland. You cannot revert the edits until a consensus has been made.

Should it be formatted as:

Peace Treaty signed:

- Ethiopia loses access to the sea

-Establishment of Habesh Eylat

- Military stalemate? Replayerr (talk) 01:00, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

The Trimmingham force explicitly mentions a "Turkish conquest" that was impending but was eventually lifted through the Emperor's campaigns which Franz Amadeus says liquidated the Ottoman army at Addi Qarro. Sarsa Dengel also recaptured Debarwa as stated in every single one of the sources. The Pankhurst source says the attack on Debarwa was a "razzia" and not an attempt to capture the fort and the Pasha of the fort was killed so the raid was successful as well by also compelling the aggressors to sue for peace and abandon their "Tigrean" ally who was himself defeated by the Emperor in 1589. So the confrontation resulted in an Ethiopian victory in the mainland while Ottomans maintained their island and small costal possessions through a piece offering to the Emperor. Glockerov (talk) 07:11, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

• I meant the attack of Hergigo(Arkiko/Arqiqo) was a razzia, not the one on Debarwa.

Glockerov (talk) 08:40, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

I've worded it as "Ethiopian victory in the Interior lands" which should be less confusing. While stating Ottoman possession of the costal towns of Hergigo and Massawa. The Ethiopians liquidated an Ottoman army at Addi Qarro in Tigray and ejected them from Debarwa before successfully raiding Hergigo where the pasha kedawert was killed in 1589. Thus, they were victorious militarily against the invaders who posed a "threat"of conquest of the interior lands, advanced as far inwards as Tembien, since they pushed them all the way back to the coastal fringe locations. Glockerov (talk) 09:01, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Giancarlo Casale talks about their ambitions:

Ozdemir had the unusual opportunity to meet face-to-face with the sultan in the private gardens of Topkapı Palace, where he presented a plan to capitalize on recent gains in Yemen by extending Ottoman influence along the Red Sea’s African coast as well. The sultan found Ozdemir’s case convincing, and before the year was out, he was on his way to Egypt with authorisation to raise an expeditionary force of several thousand men. (page 108)[6]

Ismael Ibrahim Mukhtar states:

"Nonetheless, the Ottomans were successful in driving the Portuguese out of the Red Sea and taking control of Massawa and its environs. The Ottoman victory not only ended the Portuguese potential threat to Islam in the region, but also brought parts of Eritrea under the influence of the Ottomans for centuries." [7] (page 86)

Do you want to state that the Ottomans were victorious in establishing a presence in Eritrea instead? You can't simply state "Ethiopian victory" without outlining the victories the Ottomans also faced by blocking Ethiopia's access to the sea

You literally ignore what Trimingham writes about the last parts of the conflict.

"The king returned and advanced against them, but the Turks retired into Arkiko and he decided to try and evict them once and for all from Abyssinia. He failed in this. The fortress was attacked but so strongly held that it could not be taken, and the Abyssinian army being without reinforcements had to retire to the mountains to eliminate the rebel Tigrean chief. After accomplishing this and returning to Debarwa, the Negus found rich gifts awaiting him from the Pasha Kadawer. He accepted these and made peace, and from that time (1589) the menace of Turkish conquest was lifted, for with the decline of Ottoman power, Arkiko and Massawa were handed over to a local Beja (Balaw) chieftain to act as na'ib (deputy) of the Ottoman government."

The peace treaty made by Pasha Kadawer prevented the menace of the Turkish conquest. Replayerr (talk) 12:15, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

1. The Ottomans had territorial ambitions which they abandoned due to the series of defeats they suffered according to Harold G. Marcus, hence the Ethiopian victory. The Ottomans didn't block the Ethiopian access to the sea as even the article mentions they had beilul in control so there's no complete Ottoman blockade in that sense and no victory for "blocking Ethiopia's access" to the sea as you claim.

2. Again, the attack against debarwa was described as a razzia by Pankhurst who details how the pasha was killed("struck to the ground") compelling the Ottomans to sue for peace. So the failure Trimmingham states is nonexistent. And thus, Ethiopian victory in the interior lands is plausible as they achieved victories in two pitched battles, captured Debarwa and raided Hergigo forcing to Ottomans to request peace. Glockerov (talk) 12:31, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

1. Ethiopia's direct access via Massawa was cut off by the Ottomans hence they had to use the Dankali Sultanate's port instead. The Ottomans also led a blockade against Baylul if you've read Pankhurst's book to the fullest extent.

"Baylul was not extensively used at this time. This was partly due to difficulties encountered on the journey, but also, as the Dutch merchant, Justinus Weijns, reported in 1676, because the Turks in control of Massawa sought to prevent evasion of their toll at that port. They would therefore "not permit sailing" from Baylul, which they regarded as a rival place of access to the sea."[8](page 389).

2. If Trimingham and Pankhurst both have conflicting views regarding how peace was established then it is best to add these opposing views in the article rather than the infobox.

I agree that they had failed to penetrate the interior however they established a stronghold on the Eritrean coastline to increase their influence in the Red Sea to counter the Portuguese and were victorious in that regard. Replayerr (talk) 13:07, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

I've found your new version Somwewhat agreeable. Glockerov (talk) 12:35, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

@Socialwave597 has had multiple discussions stating that it wasn't an Ethiopian victory so it's best not to add Ethiopian victory. It might be changed in the future. Replayerr (talk) 13:14, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

"I would say that the Ottomans were victorious in conquering the coastline but were defeated attempting to conquer Ethiopia, or even the Christian highlands adjacent to the coastal lowlands such as Hamasien. Neither side achieved their main objectives, therefore I see no point in adding "Ottoman victory" or "Ethiopian victory" to the infobox, as it would make no sense, especially without sources explicitly stating so." Replayerr (talk) 13:14, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

1. You're wrong. The Ethiopian side absolutely achieved their main objective which was to prevent the conquest and subjugation of the Empire. They also forced the Ottomans to abandon their territorial ambitions as stated by Harold G. Marcus who was Quoted above.

2.That coupled with their military victories which Franz Amadeus describes as a "Liquidation" of the invading Ottoman army, their capture of Debarwa along with the vast riches stored in it while receiving ceremonial cannon salute from the defeated Ottomans, their successful raid against arkiko(Hergigo) which struck down the Ottoman pasha and forced them to sue for peace makes the "phrase" Ethiopian victory in the interior plausible. Glockerov (talk) 13:45, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

It would be considered WP:OR when the sources you've shared do not explicitly state that it was an Ethiopian victory. It's quite fringe to heavily rely on a single source when Trimingham states otherwise. Keep it as it is because neither side reached their objectives. The Ottomans failed in attempting to conquer Ethiopia, or even the Christian highlands adjacent to the coastal lowlands such as Hamasien. While the Ethiopians failed to expel the Ottomans. Keep it as it is or it'll be deemed disruptive editing. A consensus must be reached on the talk page before any edits are made. Replayerr (talk) 13:50, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

1. The cited sources describe the Ethiopian victories in the interior in refined detail and the Ethiopians were able to achieve their main objective of repulsing the Ottoman invasion.

2. Moreover, it is not one source but four that detail the Ethiopian Victories in the interior Glockerov (talk) 13:58, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

The Ottomans also tried to take all of Mereb Milash and Tigray, they had outposts as far as Agame and Tembien until they were defeated at the Battle of Addi Qorro. However their hold on the coastline remained unbroken and an Ethiopian siege on Hirgigo ended in failure. The sources instead say that this war ended in a stalemate between the Ottomans and the Ethiopians after they signed a peace treaty in 1589.

"detailing Ethiopian victories", no sources explicitly state a general victory against the Ottomans in the conquest of Habesh. The Ottomans were "victorious" in conquering Hirgigo and Massawa from the Abyssinians yet I wouldn't push the notion. Please refer to WP:NPOV instead of harming the neutrality of the article as it was a general stalemate.

I agree that they were able to repulse an Ottoman invasion which is why I added "Ethiopian Empire prevents incursions into the highlands" instead. Although they failed to expel the Ottomans from the coastline and lost two ports.

The entire conflict resulted in a peace treaty being signed between the two parties. Replayerr (talk) 14:08, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

@GlockerovCan you respond instead of making disruptive edits?

You can add an "Ethiopian victory" in the highlands if you can add an "Ottoman victory" on the coastline Replayerr (talk) 14:12, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

1. Every single source I cited describes the series of Ethiopian victories achieved in the interior lands in detail.

2. The Ethiopians campaign against Arkiko was not a siege but a razzia that killed the Pasha according to Pankhurst and the Ottomans were forced to sue for peace according to G. Marcus, Franz Amadeus, Pankhurst and Trimmingham which implies they lost the war.

3. The Ottomans didn't capture Massawa from the Ethiopians as it was out of their hands a long time ago.

4. The conflict did result in a peace treaty after the Ottomans sued for peace which is what they did after the Great Turkish war as well Glockerov (talk) 14:20, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

I have shared sources on Ottoman victories and will include it to keep the neutrality of the article. You seem insistent on not accepting the failure of expelling the Ottomans from the coastline. People before you have tried including an "Ethiopian victory" on this article ands refrained from doing such. If Trimingham states that it was a failed siege and Pankhurst describes it as a razzia. Then they are to be included in the article rather than the infobox, check Wikipedia:Conflicting sources . You do not discards Trimingham's opinion of the event and declare Pankhurst's to be true.

The main objective of the Ottomans was to gain influence on Eritrea's coastline which they succeeded to counter the Portuguese.

Ozdemir had the unusual opportunity to meet face-to-face with the sultan in the private gardens of Topkapı Palace, where he presented a plan to capitalize on recent gains in Yemen by extending Ottoman influence along the Red Sea’s African coast as well. The sultan found Ozdemir’s case convincing, and before the year was out, he was on his way to Egypt with authorisation to raise an expeditionary force of several thousand men. (page 108)[6]

"Nonetheless, the Ottomans were successful in driving the Portuguese out of the Red Sea and taking control of Massawa and its environs. The Ottoman victory not only ended the Portuguese potential threat to Islam in the region, but also brought parts of Eritrea under the influence of the Ottomans for centuries." [9]

"which implies they lost the war" - This is clearly original research, so read the WP:OR

They were victorious in seizing the Eritrean coastline but failed in the highlands. I deem this a fair and neutral position to make instead of giving the infobox an Ethiopian-bias. Replayerr (talk) 14:40, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

I've found your current version of the article somewhat agreeable. Although the "victory" your source states is claimed over the Portuguese in contradiction to an article on the Ottoman-Portuguese conflicts which states otherwise. The Ottoman victory in the coast is still dubious and unsupported even by some of the sources you cited. However, I agree that they maintained a hold of the two towns in the coast despite the crushing defeat they suffered at the hands of the Emperor who, Pankhurst states, also killed their commander in Arkiko forcing them to sue for peace. Glockerov (talk) 16:57, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

The Ottomans didn't invade Abyssinia for no reason. They needed dominance in the Red Sea to counter the Portuguese. Their objective was to establish a territory between Suakin and Zayla-Berbera. They sued for peace which led to an ending of aggressions on both sides. They were victorious in establishing a coastline presence but failed in the highlands. Replayerr (talk) 20:59, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

1. Your claim "Their objective was to establish a territory between Suakin and Zayla-Berbera." is a weak original research.

2. Their objective was abandoned after their defeat at the hands of Sarsa Dengel as the scholar Harold G. Marcus stated

3. Your source Mukhtar is talking about a victory over the Portuguese which wasn't real on the grand image as referenced in the Ottoman Portuguese conflicts article

4. Mukhtar explicitly puts the decimation of their military capability as a potential reason of their abandonment of the eyalet after so much enthusiasm.

5. The Ethiopians were also again victorious in the coast where they killed Kedawert Pasha according encyclopedia of Islam and Pankhurst Glockerov (talk) 21:21, 17 December 2024 (UTC)