Latest comment: 10 months ago by BerkBerk68 in topic Possible Turkic origins of Subutai

Where did he get the information???Edit

THe autor is being incredibly lyrical about Subotai´s performance in europa. Also the only article to which he refers is actually smaller then the stuff he writes.....

some criticism from a more experienced wikipedier plz

btw the cart part of the story is back again

Removed it again: "During the European campaigns, the once trim Subutai was so heavy that horses could not easily bear his weight. But he was so valued on the battlefield that Batu Khan had him carried to the field in a cart or wagon. " Removed. Robruss24 (talk) 12:34, 21 January 2010 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This author mentions the Mongols suffered less than 1000 casualties, and then doesn't provide a citation??? That is pretty amateur. The lines about Mongol casualties at Mohi should be deleted, or cited, and I'd love to see that citation, because I've read a lot of the contemporary sources on these events, and I can pretty much smell "nonsense". Why are the articles on wiki about the Mongol invasion of Europe so horrifically badly written? And political too... — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 09:09, 1 October 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I find the figure of 1,900 km covered in a week by Subutai as exaggeration and hence have removed it. He provided Frank Mclynn's book, the biography of Genghis Khan as his citation and evidence for the figure, however the author of the book uses The Secret History Of Mongols as his primary source for Mongol military exploits, this is an enigmatic source that often exaggerates the military accomplishments of Mongols along with sometimes exaggerating the death toll caused by Mongol campaigns. Hence I have decided to remove this statement.


Shouldn't this be at Subotai? That's how I've normally seen it spelled. john k 00:56, 22 November 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Tuvan heritage?Edit

I added the info that he was an ethnic Tuvan. I hope that is accurate. This is part of Tuvan oral history but I don't know if the history books bear it out. Badagnani 17:30, 29 November 2005 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Subutai was Urianghai, a name the Mongols used for all forest people. As Otto Mänchen-Helfen wrote in Journey to Tuva, all Tuvans are Urianghai but not all Urianghai are Tuvans. --Stacey Doljack Borsody 16:06, 14 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yes, Subutai was a Tuvan Turkic Kurya Khan (talk) 16:59, 18 January 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

What a name!Edit

Subutai...Subudai, Subatei, Supatay...however you spell's still one hell of a name and the sound of it brings up the image an angry and violent eastern warrior who is about to strike you with his sabre (i guess when he's younger before the obesity kicked in).

Wonder where we can find more info on his life and career?

I removed this part:
This emphasis on light cavalry was particularly wryly amusing since he himself grew so heavy that he had to literally be hauled around in a wagon! Yet his mind more than made up for his fat and failing body. He was an incredible military mind, who is considered, and rightly so, as one of the single finest military strategists of all history. He was that rarest of assets, a genius of war who could both plan the strategic campaign, and alter tactics in the midst of the chaos of a battlefield.
- all very interesting, but not at all POV, and not exactly encyclopedic. Palefire 11:40, 27 March 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, there are certain parts of this that seem more suited to an essay than an article. Needs revision. 03:07, 11 April 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This article is full of errors. His father was not a blacksmith and he was of the Uriangqai tribe. The section on tactics is also wrong. The comment on his weight is a misreading of the Secret History and SWCCL. Best spelling of his name is Sübe'etei (as rendered in the de Rachewiltz translation of the Secret History). Left out of the account is also most of the 22 campaigns he directed as well as the more than 35 battles he can be associated with.

Incredible age?Edit

It should further be noted that Subutai was 65 years old during the European campaign, an incredible age for that era for a military commander It was not at all unusual, in any time period, for a successful commander to continue to lead armies as long as his health would allow. Narses was 74 when he commanded the armies of Justinian against the Ostrogoths. Geiseric was 65 when he captured Rome, and 78 when he defended Carthage against a Roman attack. Charlemagne led armies when he was in his 60s. Subutai was old for a general, but not incredibly so. Jsc1973 18:41, 9 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Yeah but not very many at that age would of been able to successfully plan and carry out the destruction of the entire European continent.
He didn't plan and carry out the destruction of the entire European continent. He did plan and carry out the invasion of Russia and an excursion into Poland and Hungary, but that's as far as it got. It is, however, a somewhat surprising age for a Mongol general, considering he had to ride ~1000 miles from the court of Ogodei to Russia and spend months in the saddle in the process. However, since Genghis Khan was not exactly a young man himself when he led the invasions of Khwarezmia and Western Xia (though he died during the latter), I wouldn't myself describe it as "incredible". siafu 15:21, 23 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wasn't he overweight as hell? Some of the articles here states that Subutai (at the time of the European campaigns) was overweight and had to be haul around in a cart because he was to heavy to sit on a horse.
No, this story is taken from a referance in Mongol/Chinese sources/Rashid al-Din that he had iron reinforced rings on the cart-wheels when setting off on a long range campaign. To infer that he used the cart for himself and needed the rings because he was overweight seems a stretch.

Having read a bit about him of late, I can't find any reference to him being overweight, I recommend this paragraph be removed. I'll leave for a few days in case anyone can come up with any evidence. Robruss24 08:54, 18 June 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Conan the BarbarianEdit

I was watching Conan the Barbarian the other day. Isn't Subutai the same guy (or hence the same character's name) from that Movie?

Conan the Barbarian is a work of fiction. It does not depict any actual events whatsoever, and doesn't even take place on Earth. The Subotai in the movie is a thief, and aside from the name, has absolutely nothing in common with the real person. siafu 20:07, 25 October 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It would be interesting to know whether the name of the character han been chosen by its author(s) as a reference to the historical person. If that is the case, the information could have its place in the article, in some "cultural references" section. Valhalla 19:13, 10 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I suppose so, but unless you can actually establish that (good luck), it's neither factual nor notable. siafu 04:01, 11 November 2006 (UTC)Reply[reply]

merge discussionEdit

support merge, it's the same guy, this name without diacritics is preferred. Chris 05:31, 25 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Supprt I thought I had this article on my watchlist... Glad someone suggested the merge. I think the other name is from Chinese transliteration. I think we should keep this name. --Stacey Doljack Borsody 02:34, 3 February 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Nothing to discuss further Same person. `'mikka 02:45, 3 February 2007 (UTC).Reply[reply]

This is the same person, and this is the better article, so the other should be shut down and referred here. old windy bear 13:12, 13 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Merge done...just needs cleaning up now. --Stacey Doljack Borsody 16:01, 14 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

You are really mixing good wine with bad here. I provided a summary of Sube'etei (as Igor de Rachewiltz renders his name in the Secret History) based on the actual sources. Instead you mix in material derived the complete nonsense coming from authers with no knowledge of the important sources (Gabriel, Nicolle,etc). Sube'etei did not come from a forest tribe, but from a Mongol tribe with the same name as a forest tribe (see Rashid al-Din or Buell).


What does "prefered spelling Sübeetei" mean? Wikipedia seems to prefer the spelling "Subutai".—Nat Krause(Talk!·What have I done?) 23:39, 25 January 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

In modern Mongolian, the most common spelling seems to be "субутай", which coincides with "Subutai" according to WP:MON. I haven't found any hints at a possibly different historical spelling yet, though. "Subeetei" is simply nonsense, as are most of the other spelling variants given. --Latebird 21:19, 14 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm wondering if we could clean it up a bit. I vote for keeping the modern Mongolian spelling and historical spellings from primary sources. --Stacey Doljack Borsody 21:22, 14 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
From a note in Grousset: "Spelt Sübügätäi in Mongolian, Sübü'ätäi in the Mongol text of the Yüan-ch'ao-pi-shih..." according to Pelliot.
I need to correct myself: Subutai (субутай) appears to be the russian spelling. Mongolian sources consistently use Sübeedei (Сүбээдэй).
Sübügätäi and Sübü'ätäi are obviously transcribed fom the classical mongolian script, even if possibly with a detour through Chinese. Maybe we can find an example in the ancient script somewhere, and transcribe directly from there. --Latebird 22:18, 14 May 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

spelling againEdit

This is the exact reason why people leave Wikipedia, over stupid and trivial arguments that waste other editors time. Why would Latebird revert a wikilink to Uriankhai because the spelling is different from Urianqai (note that Kipchaq in the article is also different from Kipchaks)? Who else goes around removing wikilinks because they didn't agree with spelling? And who the hell needs to provide such justification on the talk page for such spelling changes when the article is named Uriankhai? If you didn't like the spelling Latebird, why remove the wikilink? Why not just keep the wikilink and change the spelling back to the way you like it instead of getting into a stupid revert war/argument with me? You need to justify that if you expect me to justify a stupid spelling change. And please, put the wikilink back. --Stacey Doljack Borsody 18:39, 13 August 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

It has been a while now, but just for the record: My explanation and apology was posted on the user's talk page about ten minutes before the above. --Latebird 10:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]


jelme was not subotai's cousin but his older brother. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Citanes (talkcontribs) 15:50, 10 September 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Looks like you're right, fixed now. --Latebird 14:19, 21 October 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Subutai said to Genghis Khan:Edit

"You know, with an army behind you, you could become extremely political." —Preceding unsigned comment added by Phalanxpursos (talkcontribs) 08:49, 21 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]

And your reliable sources are? --Latebird (talk) 16:25, 21 November 2007 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I noticed it was the same line used in the movie "Gladiator". You've been watching too much hollywood Phalanxpursos! (talk) 12:10, 12 June 2008 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Redundancies in the articleEdit

It seems that of July 22nd 2011 that the two sections on Subutai's second invasion of Europe should be merged. One focuses more on dates and the other is more of a narrative. If someone could artfully combine the two, while eliminating repetition that would greatly improve the readability of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eriol11 (talkcontribs) 03:50, 22 July 2011 (UTC)Reply[reply]

His Mongolian nameEdit

There were some previous discussions on this guy's name, but they are from years ago and it hasn't been discussed since. I've taken the liberty of making a few changes:

It makes no sense to list his name in modern Khalkha Mongol as his "native name" and to have it listed first in the article. This would be as if the article on Julius Caesar gave his "native name" as Giulio Cesare (his name in modern Italian). Since he is an important figure to Mongolia, I have kept the Modern Mongolian name, but placed it after the Classical Mongolian version. I have also changed the spelling of the Khalkha version to that used on the Mongolian Wikipedia.

In the meantime, I of course have no idea whether the names given in Classical Mongolian are accurate at all. They were and are still unsourced; all I did was rearrange them. (talk) 11:38, 11 December 2014 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Dogs of War CitationEdit

I recently found a history book that includes a section about Subutai, "History's Greatest Untold Stories: The Larger Than Life Characters and Dramatic Events That Changed History." I trust that is accurate, since after being initially published by another company, it was bought and republished by the National Geographic Society. I'll also list the other three dogs of war. Compassionate727 (talk) 17:04, 6 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I just discovered that the dogs of war are listed at the very bottom of the article. It seems strange to include them there and not in where they're actually mentioned in the article. I'll fix that when I cite the section. Compassionate727 (talk) 17:07, 6 May 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Possible Turkic origins of SubutaiEdit

Subutai was a Turk not mongolian — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cupzz7 (talkcontribs) 14:58, 25 December 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

That's pretty obnoxious. Everywhere on the internet, I have seen Turkish people trying to rob famous historical figures from other peoples, including Genghis Khan, Attila, and many others. That needs to be stopped. Sherwilliam (talk) 14:44, 19 June 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
He indeed was false about the "not mongolian" part, but Subutai actually might have Turkic origins (see [1]), aswell as Attila might be Oghuric. We as wikipedia editors should be open to every academical opinions and represent them (WP:DUE) properly. BerkBerk68 14:24, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

As far as I know Subutai was a Tuvan — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mnl0g 044 (talkcontribs) 16:02, 25 October 2020 (UTC) Reply[reply]

See Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Smokva26. --Wario-Man (talk) 19:19, 9 December 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The reference seemed to be reliable indeed. BerkBerk68 14:27, 5 August 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Subutai being outnumbered by the Khwarezmshah is not clearEdit

The current version of the article states "Despite being outnumbered three to one against the Sultan's elite forces". That number is disputed as shown in the relevant battle's wikipage: Battle near the Irghiz River#Army strengths and formation. Several historians suggest that they might have equal number of troops or Shah's superiority might have been 1.5 - 1 ratio. It should be amended -- (talk) 18:44, 27 August 2021 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Issues with crossreference between this article and the deep operation articleEdit

In the section'Deep_Battle'_theory, it's stated that the style inspired the Russian approach.

The article about the Russian approach mentions none of this.

Do we delete the statements here, or do we add them there? (talk) 04:45, 22 July 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]