Talk:Menumorut

message: I find an other interpretation more convincing.
Cozar means Bulgar, not Kabar.
1. Anonymus knew Nestor's chronicle and used it extensively.
2. Nestor wrote: "cozars namely bulgars"
3. This is why Anonymus named the people of Menumorout (who had Bulgar heart) cozars.
4. Kabars are rebel Khazars who joined to the Magyars and fought their side in the conquest not against them.
I am planning to change the text. Opinions?
Bye, Laszlo
:I think it is most honest to use the words names etc exactly as Anonymous used them, and as a note, refer to sources demonstrating Anonymous meant bulgars by cozars. I understand Nestor chronicle was recopied, and that it is susceptible to later edits to the original text Criztu 18:39, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Interpretation for "cozar" 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Menumorut. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110721104716/http://www.erdelyert.hu/images/products/original/4936.jpeg to http://www.erdelyert.hu/images/products/original/4936.jpeg
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:41, 8 June 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The text at http://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/18975/1/18975.pdf says: "Duke Morout, whose grandson was called by the Hungarians Menumorout,46 because he had concubines, had taken possession of the land between the Tisza and Igfon wood, that lies towards Transylvania [ad Erdeuelu], from the Maros river up to the Szamos [Zomus], and the peoples that are called Cozar47 inhabited that land."
So there are two characters here, Duke Morout, and his grandson Menumorut. 
Why is this not reflected in the article?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.93.13.37 (talk) 19:20, 13 February 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: Please read the text under the subtitle "Menumorut and his duchy". Borsoka (talk) 02:37, 14 February 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Distinction between duke Morut and his grandson? 

message: This article appears to be cobbled together from information from several other articles. The subject is barely even mentioned in much of it, and the sections that do mention him are either excessively detailed retelings of the single historic record he's mentioned in, as well as a description of lengthy debates between historians - debates that seem to be based mostly on speculation. Overall, I'm getting the impression that this was intended to be a thesis rather than an encyclopedia article. 46.97.170.112 (talk) 13:01, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for your above remarks. You maybe right, but the article summarizes most available information about Menumorut, that is the single (and late) source about his life and the scholarly debates about its reliability. Borsoka (talk) 13:59, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text:  This isn't really a summary, more like an unabridged retelling of the entire chapter where he appears in. The same applies to the historiography section, which could do without a lot of the trivia. Considering that Gesta Hungarorum is but one historic document, and a heavily disputed one at that, writing a full synopsis that spans multiple articles that also overlap in their content is most WP:UNDUE. In addition, the background section contains information that is only tangentially related. Information on the hungarian conquest, and the relevant medieval history of geographic region are better suited in their respective articles, which are linked. The articles on the other two dukes mentioned in the Gesta Hungarorum follow an identical pattern. 46.97.170.112 (talk) 09:34, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, the three articles follow a similar pattern. A "Background" section summarizes the principal events of the Hungarian conquests of the Carpathian Basin, because I am not sure that an average reader knows what happened around 900 in Central Europe, or who are the Khazars and Kavars. The second part of the article summarizes the narration from the Gesta Hungarorum, because this is the only source of Menumorut's/Gelou's/Glad's life (if they lived at all). Finally, a "Historiography" section present the scholarly debates about the reliability of the source. Borsoka (talk) 00:54, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: You are correct, the average reader wouldn't know that, which is why there are links to other articles on the Hungarian conquest of the Carpathian Basin, the Khazars, the Avars, or the Gesta Hungarorum. Please consider WP:COATRACK, and especially it's very end: . 46.97.170.112 (talk) 09:34, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for the link. I think the articles do not contradict this specific policy, either. Our average reader will hardly be surprised if they can read a summary of the relevant parts of the articles about Khazars, Kabars, etc. in the Background section of this article. Borsoka (talk) 10:05, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Article is padded, information on subject is minimal 

message: Historiography means the study of history itself. The word should never be used for what historians happen to say on one topic.- Dejvid (talk) 12:36, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: Historiography