Jump to content

Talk:Barbary Wars

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 189.4.100.152 (talk) at 14:23, 12 October 2019. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

XYZ Affair

The XYZ Affair and "millions for defense" happened during the Adams administration and led to the U.S. French Naval War (1798-1800), which is different than the Barbary Wars. Kauffner (talk) 09:37, 23 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]


General overview of the Barbary Wars

This page served as a general overview of the Barbary wars with links to each war as well as the Barbary corsairs and other topics for the longest time with no perceived problems, let alone actual problems.. Many pages link to Barbary wars e.g. Captain Smith served in the Barbary Wars. Both wars involved basically the same things. There is no need for a redirect, and no need to fix what wasn't broke. I do a lot of writing about this era -- now I have to go through dozens of pages and fix links(?) and indicate and link to both wars in one sentence. e.g. Captain Smith served in the First Barbary War and the Second Barbary War. No thanks. This page with its many links to other pages suited readers and editors just fine. -- Gwillhickers 16:39, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How exactly did America have victory when the barbary countries declared victory

Libyan kid 543 (talk) 16:21, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Was Tunis really part of the Barbary Wars ?

Tunis is seldomly mentioned as a belligerent in the articles and usually just lumped as part of the ottoman empire in north africa. I also found this extract from the book of french historian Henry Durant in 1858, Notice sur la régence de Tunis, page 16: "Tunis, in general, did not indulge in piracy like Algiers: if later, it also had some corsairs, it was only to defend itself against the Christians, more barbarians at that time than the Africans, since the piracy was still a trade among Cypriots, Catalans, Sicilians, Venetians, Pisans and Genoese."

From french "Tunis, en général, ne se livrait pas comme Alger à la piraterie: si plus tard elle eut aussi quelques corsaires, ce ne fut que pour se défendre contre les chrétiens, plus barbares à cette époque que les Africains, puisque la piraterie était encore un métier chez les Cypriotes, les Catalans, les Siciliens, les Vénitiens, les Pisans et les Génois." [1]

If so I would like to remove it as a belligerent in this conlict.

Mistakes

The page is full of minor mistakes, but one of them is unbelievable. "The main purpose of their attacks was to capture European slaves for the Arab slave market in North Africa." There was NO single European slave in Europe. The correct phrase is: "To enslave Europeans". They weren't slaves as the Africans who were bought and brought to Americas. So the phrase is a major mistake. It gives the impression that they captured slaves, they did not. They enslaved people.

  1. ^ Dunant, Henry (1858). "Notice sur la régence de Tunis".