Talk:Battle of Köse Dağ

Disputed

• Mamluks come to power not before 1250s, therefore if Baibars come to aid of Seljuks, it must be after 1250s which may be 1260, Battle of Homs.
• Also the reason for retreat of turkish army is not clear.
• Genghis is apparently of Mongol origin, not Caucausian(this have to be removed, genghis is known for his red hair, not a mongolid property, its highly probable that his ancestors were appointed prices to the Mogol tribe(that of Temuchin) by their previous rulers gokturks as they replaced many of the princes(bey), but this is just a theory only fact is genghis was not mongolid, probably turkic or arian )

That's absolute rubbish. Tumijen was a Mongol, through and through.50.111.11.25 (talk) 01:35, 1 November 2020 (UTC)

Where was the Battle of Köse Dağ

The Encyclopaedia of Islam states that Köse Dağ is a “land-corridor some 50 miles/80 km. to the north-west of Sīwās” and, under “Kaykhusraw II” in the same work, “between Erzindjan and Sivas.” Cahen in Pre-Ottoman Turkey locates the battle in “the defile of Köse Dagh, in the province of Erzinjān.” My cherished Turkish atlas, Köy Köy Türkiye: Yol atlası (Istanbul 2006), puts Kösedağ Geçidi (Köse Dağ Pass) to the south of Gümüşhane and well to the north of Erzincan. In 13th century terms, this would be close to the lands of the Empire of Trebizond and nowhere near the caravan route between Sivas and Erzincan. Can anyone produce a credible source in any language that offers more precision? Thanks Aramgar 16:25, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

The information above is corroborated by Anthony Bryer and Richard Winfield, The Byzantine Monuments and Topography of the Pontos, vol. 1, (Washington D.C.: Dumbarton Oaks, 1985) 172, 353. Aramgar 21:12, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Unsourced Material

I have removed this section from the article. If someone can adduce a source, it can be easily restored. Aramgar 18:49, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

In fact, the Sultan had left the field after he saw his forces were almost twice the size of that of the Tatars and Mongols. He probably thought that it would be an easy victory. However, when the soldiers saw him leaving the field, some of them started to retreat as a result.

Source is Larousse as i have also read it. I will find more and complete the topic as i remember the forces were 30 000 sultanate of rum against 15 000 tatars —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.100.208.79 (talk) 17:10, 11 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008

Ensured that the article is within project scope, tagged for task forces, and assessed for class. --Rosiestep (talk) 21:29, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

Lev Gumilev

The source "Л.Н.Гумилев - Чёрная легенда" added by User:Enerelt (diff) seems to be the following: Gumilev, L. N. (Lev Nikolaevich), Chernai'a' legenda : druz'i'a' i nedrugi Velikoĭ stepi (Moscow: Aĭris Press, 2003). I am not so parochial as to expect every source on en.wikipedia to be in English but would like a second opinion on this one. Lev Gumilev seems to have had some strange ideas, and I am curious to know how he came to the numbers he does, as the primary sources say very little about troop strength. Aramgar (talk) 16:05, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

Past experience indicates that in most situations, Gumilev should be considered at least controversial. He seems to have been a strange mixture of panturkist, soviet propagandist, and even antisemit. Other historians often disagree with him (even if they discuss his views), as he apparently came to many of his conclusions in absense of primary sources. Other discussions where his views have been debated as scientific fringe are Talk:Mongol invasion of Rus', Talk:Sabir people, Talk:Dingling, Talk:Olga of Kiev, Talk:Göktürks, Talk:Radhanite, Talk:Khazars/Archive 1, and many others (very incomplete list). The usual consensus seems to be that Gumilev's views may be mentioned in articles as alternative interpretations, but should not be given undue weight. So far I've only seen one editor who takes him at face value and considers him a reliable source. --Latebird (talk) 01:19, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Sejuks invasion of Georgia and Greater Armenia

Anatolian turks had raided Georgia and Armenia first before 1242.--Enerelt (talk) 01:15, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Source? Aramgar (talk) 02:27, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Please see Монголы татарын в Азий и Европе --Enerelt (talk) 09:15, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

It is true that Kayqubad I invaded Georgia in 1236-1237 as a punitive response to a Mongol raid. The Armenians of Cilicia were also reluctant vassals of the Seljuqs.The statement you have included in the article implies that Seljuqs provoked the Mongols, which is not the case. On the book title you have supplied above, please see consult the following policies: WP:VUE and WP:CITE. Aramgar (talk) 12:56, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Ok. As you wish. --Enerelt (talk) 00:47, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Armenian name of the site

Is the Armenian name of the site relevant in some significant way? I propose the removal of it for the sake of brevity.--Eleman (talk) 19:51, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

No objection then.--Eleman (talk) 13:35, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Objection. Given the confusion over the location (see the talk page discussion Where was the Battle of Köse Dağ) having an alternative name as a possible aid to the location could be useful. However, I have not yet returned the Armenian name since I do not know if it is sourced. Does it come from Bryer and Winfield? The Köy Köy Türkiye Yol Atlası, map 61, source looks like OR to me. Köse Dagh as a modern placename is found in several locations. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 02:34, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

It is in Kirakos Gandzakets'i's History of the Armenians, Robert Bedrosian translation, section 35. So I have restored the Armenian name. Tiptoethrutheminefield (talk) 03:00, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

تصویر مقاله

تصویر اشتباهه ،فکر کنم صلیبیان در تعقیب مسلمانان هستند ، به پرچم دقت کنید 5.53.40.40 (talk) 09:56, 9 August 2024 (UTC)

Translation: "The picture is wrong, I think the Crusaders are chasing the Muslims, pay attention to the flag" ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:17, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

@AirshipJungleman29: I checked: the attribution seems correct. The picture is from folio 18 of the Bibliothèque nationale de France NAF 886 edition, here. The text of the manuscript on this page does refer to the victory of the Mongol over the Turks at "Cosadac" (obviously "Köse Dağ"), "followed by the conquest of Turkey in 1244" (final sentence before the large illuminated "A"). The transcription of this page in modern print is here p.159. So the picture indeed seems to refer to the Mongols defeating the Turks at Köse Dağ. पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 04:46, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

The text also explains that the "knights from the Crusader Latin Empire" who supported the Seljuks were two captains named Jehan de la Limniate, from Cyprus, and Boniface de Molins, from Venice (Hayton - La Flor des estoires de la terre d’Orient. pp. 158–159.). पाटलिपुत्र (Pataliputra) (talk) 06:13, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the confirmation. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:15, 9 October 2024 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

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

Nominator: AirshipJungleman29 (talk · contribs) 22:45, 8 October 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Premeditated Chaos (talk · contribs) 01:00, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Bug me if I don't finish within the week. Cheers! ♠PMC♠ (talk) 01:00, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for picking it up PMC; I'd love to get this promoted before the WikiCup finishes at the end of the month. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 12:37, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Assuming you're going to FAC with this in the future, so looking from that POV. Won't hold up promotion on anything outside the GACR however.

• Suggest linking Anatolia, I know we don't always link locations but as it's not a modern country I think you're better off doing it
  • Done.
• I'm not sure "cordial relations" is the right phrase for "busy kicking someone else's ass", even if it is obliquely funny
  • Adjusted.
• On the other hand, "dismantled" is hilariously dry for "kicked the stuffing out of"
• Mild nitpick, "even both" might be better as "possibly both"
  • I thought that sounded wrong.
• "Relations deteriorated" - On doing my spot check, it seems like this is more complicated than it's put here. I can see why you've elided things at the GA level but I think FAC might look for some more detail (in this instance, Atwood and Melwille seem to differ on whether or not Kaykhusraw actually agreed to submit. Atwood says the Mongols were exerting pressure on him to do so around 1240, while Melville says Kaykhusraw agreed to submit but the Mongols attacked anyway for their own reasons before Kaykhusraw's Mongol overseer showed up)
  • I'll keep that in mind if I take it further.
• All that being said - Kaykhusraw needles the Mongols, rebuffs their ambassadors, then attacks them without his entire army? Was he profesionally stupid?
  • Classic blunder—trying to start a land war in Asia. Of course, the Mongols did it, so he may have thought he had a chance.
• Do we know what Kaykhusraw did after he fled? And/or how he died?
  • I'd guess that he returned to central Anatolia after the peace was arranged, but I can't find anything about that.

That's it for prose commentary, this is pretty tidy so not much to gripe about.

Sources are reliable and appropriately used. Spot checks on those I could access turned up no issues. Jackson and Peacock checked out fully. Atwood and Melville are sometimes a bit complicated in the details, but I think the summaries are appropriate for GA. Images are used appropriately, and either freely licensed or old. No other GACR concerns. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 19:29, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the review Premeditated Chaos! ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:41, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Cheers! Happy to see this pass. I really enjoy your ability to make historical people and battles engaging. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:28, 25 October 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.