Talk:Murad I

message: Why does there appear to be a Thai-alphabet caption under the photo?? AnonMoos 16:30, 21 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I removed it. Even if it was "Murad I" in Thai (which I don't know), it is out of context to put Thai in an article about an Ottoman sultan (just like any other to the Ottomans unrelated language would be). It was added by an anon here. /The Phoenix 14:51, 23 April 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: my my, why Thai?

message: * In my opinion, we should add a section about Savcı Bey( Savcı Bey was the son and the heir of Murad I. but he betrayed his father).
* His son, Yakup, was murdered because they thought that he would want to be the new ruler. This happened just after the death of Murad I.
I want to add these details without giving any damage to this well organized article.Deliogul 15:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Offers 

message: The miniature picture, why is it there? It was made in the 20th century, and looks nothing like him. Let's scrap it.24.36.198.179 22:35, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Second Picture 

message: Okay, this maybe quite random, but the outcome could be interesting. I'm really curious about the name "Murad". The name, apparently comes from Arabic, in which the word means wish, goal, aim, etc. However the name does not have any religious or aristocratic connotations. To tell the truth, there is no ruler before Murad I that was given this name. So the name - since its in Arabic - is not Turkic, but it had not been widespread among the Muslim culture either. It seems quite peculiar to name a ruler a name that has no royal, religious, or whatsoever context. Also, the name "Murad" appears before Murad I, only as a name for an insignificant tribe in Arabic peninsula during Mohammed's reign. Am I being too curious here? Anyway, I just wanted to ask you people whether you know/guess anything about this? If we found something, it could be interesting to add it to the article. --Quinlan Vos (talk) 18:55, 8 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Very good question indeed.  Actually it is a very common name all through Middle East, Caucuses, Eastern Europe and Asia.  Common even among some non-Muslims like Armenians.  Though the word is of Arabic origin, it does not seem that they have used it as a name.  Turks seem to be the first to make that choice.  Naturally it has shown regional variations.  "d" ending is the Arabic word, "t" ending is the common and modern Turkish version.  There were a total of five Ottoman Sultans with this name. Murat (talk) 03:24, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  the name "murad" 

message: In a recent edit Murad's death was put on June 29 1389 (later June 30 1389), with edit summary: old calendar not valid. Is the idea we should use the proleptic Gregorian calendar for events that happened before the calendar reform was introduced? Even then, the date should not be later than June 24. However, several encyclopedic sources appear to have June 15.
There also appears to be considerable uncertainty about Murad's birth year, 1319 or 1326, so I wonder what the source is for pinning it down to exactly June 30, 1326.  --Lambiam 14:38, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Dates of birth and death 

message: 1362-1389, please ask Turkish historians about these dates...I also changed the Turkish Wikipedia/Vikipedi Böri (talk) 11:27, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Reign

message: The Wikipedia article on the city of Bursa says Hudavendigar means 'God's Gift.' I'm not sure as to the Persian meaning of the word, but is it possible that in Turkish the word had a different meaning than the 'God-like one?' The meaning of Hudavendigar being 'God's Gift' makes more sense since 'God-like one' would be a blasphemous title for Muslims. 108.172.143.182 (talk) 04:24, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  'Hudavendigar' 

message: From an Ottomanist perspective these sections are extremely problematic; they present certain issues that are historiographically controverial as fact without reference to sources.
The section on wars is obviously relevant, but we know that a lot of the conquests in the Balkans were made by autonomous frontier lords, and the extent to which those would have been directed or determined by Murad is the subject of historical controversies. The detail provided on Serbian expeditions is interesting but perhaps not particularly relevant.
Likewise, the information provided in the 'Establishment of Empire' section is all very interesting and entirely relevant, but almost all historically controversial. There is a great deal of debate over when and how the Ottoman Beylik (or 'Emirate', whatever) became imperial, and over the origins of the janissaries, devsirme, kul system, etc. The fact is that our grasp of early Ottoman history is incredibly uncertain, and these sections ought to reflect this rather than presenting these details as fact. (94.173.201.40 (talk) 07:16, 30 March 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sections on 'wars' and 'empire' 

message: In the part of the article describing the death of sultan Murad it's first written that he was killed by knife by Albanian noble man Millosh Kopiliç. Later in the text it is written that by some hystorical evidences Serbian nobleman Miloš (Milosh) Obilić killed him. There is article about Miloš Obilić on Wikipedia and I will link it in the end.
I just want to clarify something Miloš is Slavic name very popular between Serbs, and recorded in many Slavic countries.
It's consist of word mio/milo= dear and ending -oš(osh), a lot of Serbian names have this ending Radoš, Jagoš, Uroš, Dragoš, Njegoš...
Regarding family name Kopilic.  Kopile is Serbian word for bastard, a child of an unknown father.
Majority of Serbian (and a lot of other south Slavic) family names end with -ić/(serbian Cyrillic-ић) or -ič/ич (Slovenian and Russian). This ending denotes descendant/son of someone. For example Tomić is son of Toma(Thomas). Toma+ić=Tomić
So there isn't any possibility that he was Albanian because they aren't Slavs and their names are totally different.
I think this part about Millosh Kopiliç should be removed from this wiki article about Murad. Or noted as fictional and/or unprovable.
Article about Miloš Obilić:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milo%C5%A1_Obili%C4%87 Toskitelj (talk) 10:45, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Millosh kopiliç 

message: This section is, frankly, rubbish. It is illegible, with no citations or sources. It was introduced into the article back on 6 December 2019 by user Internetexpert41. This was a sockpuppet account for user Physo172, who has been blocked indefinitely. Much of the content added by this account has been removed from Wikipedia. I am putting the content here just in case an interested editor wishes to rescue it. Oatley2112 (talk) 06:33, 18 August 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Savcı Bey rebellion 

message: Hello. While this is given a source in the article, it makes no sense. All şehzades are grown in enderun (the state school for elite bureaucrats), and many know many languages. Some were poets and musicians or other such artists.
In murat's time the enderun hadn't been set to stone yet, but he still received some form of education, İlber Ortaylı's Türklerin Tarihi 2 page 141 states he knew Greek. A bilingual (maybe more) man can't possibly be illiterate. 31.155.216.163 (talk) 12:01, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The source used is also dubious - it being from an English aristocrat in 1917 when Britain and the Ottoman Empire were at war. Secondary source needed. Iskandar323 (talk) 12:23, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I added this. It was claimed by Joseph von Hammer-Purgstall, probably in his (1837) History of the Ottoman Empire work. Can't find the primary source but found  here, p. 117 saying Hammer claiming this because of his treaty with Ragusa Republic. Beshogur (talk) 15:06, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: It still seems we have some very dated scholarship insufficiently supported by recent academic review. What is written about the Ragusan treaty? Iskandar323 (talk) 10:08, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: Well other people are welcome to add whether is disputed by other scholars, or how much languages he speak, etc.  Regarding the treaty, he didn't sign it, but dipped his thumb in ink and signed it like that. There is not much information about his literacy actually. Beshogur (talk) 10:46, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I would not use Eversley for anything. A search for a reliable source concerning Murad I's illiteracy resulted in nothing. Although, I did find an intriguing source concerning Murad II's possible illiteracy. Needless to say, I am not sure what purpose this would serve by including this information in any article. If there was information(story, etc) leading to this fact, then I could see it being something of importance. Aside from that, it is just some random trivia that did not effect their ability(as far as I can tell) to be sultan. --Kansas Bear (talk) 19:30, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: The John Armstrong source doesn't look great either, what with its casual repetition of the rather tired Genghis Khan pyramid of skulls motif. Iskandar323 (talk) 20:05, 7 May 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Murat being illiterate