Talk:Siege of Ceuta (1419)

1419, not 1418
The siege of Ceuta was actually in 1419, not 1418. I know both years are frequently reported, but the latter one is more confident. This is an old problem provoked by conflicting dates given by Zurara's chronicles. In his Cronica da Guine, he ambiguously states that "three years passed", which many readers have taken to mean three years from the capture, thus 1418. But Zurara pinpoints the date more precisely in his Cronica de conde D. Pedro (Lib. 2, ch. 5), notes it explicitly as 1419, and that "four years passed between the capture and the siege". 1419 also conforms with the slew of papal bulls and documents designed for the defense of the city.

Although 1418 still appears frequently in some maritime histories (which usually draw only from Cronica of Guine and overlook the Cronica of Pedro), 1419 is the date used by most modern historians.

I am in the process of assembling and preparing careful references for all this, and will include a discussion on the dating problem. (And it needs to be careful, since the dating of this siege affects the dating of the official discovery of Madeira by Zarco & Teixeira). But just for now, I'd like to give you all a heads-up. Once I assemble my references, I intend to change the title of this page to Siege of Ceuta (1419). If anyone has any objections at present (or can think up a better title) let me know. (In principle, I could accept using the ambivalent "(1418/9)" in the title instead, but it looks rather ugly.) Walrasiad (talk) 15:42, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Sultanate of Morroco???
A serious mistake is committed. Morroco did not exist in this epoch it is like to say that Castile was Spain in the 13th century.

In the same way it is ridiculous, the panel of campaign. In Morocco? It would be better to change it into Portuguese campaigns into the north of Africa--88.19.30.232 (talk) 23:37, 11 September 2012 (UTC)