Talk:Hulegu Khan

message: Comments about the Mongols being "blood thirsty", ie. "the smell being too much even for the blood thirsty Mongols," are misleading, overly colorful, and offensive.  Please refer to the article regarding Genghis Khan.  Medieval Mongols maintained a taboo regarding blood and death, and conversation, much less proximity, regarding it would have been abhorrant to a Mongol. This is why Mongols traditionally use bows in mounted warfare, ie. to avoid proximity to blood.
:I agree, these terms are obviously offensive and are not impartial.  The article is generally ok, but it is obviously not unbiased. Phrique 13:37, 10 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article is not impartial 

message: It should be noted that on academic publications his name appears more often in this writing: Hülegü. Hulagu is more common in publications of scholars of middle eastern studies, who transliterate it from Arabic. David1776 16:03, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The name 

message: A depiction of Hulagu and Doquz Qatun as Christians rulers, in a Syriac Bible. Feel free to insert it in the article. Cheers PHG (talk) 16:55, 31 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Syriac Bible depiction 

message: Here is a coin of Hulagu, with the symbol of a hare. Feel free to insert it in the article. Cheers PHG (talk) 21:00, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hulagu coin 

message: It would be nice to have a discussion of Hulagu's involvement in Tibet. Elliott sperling has an article in Acta Orientalia Hungaricae about it in the 1980s. This relationship became quite important in the ideology of the rise of the Phagmodru dynasty in Tibet. Tibetologist (talk) 14:15, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hulagu and Tibet 

message: ONE OF THE LARGEST ARMIES ... blah blah. Neglects to mention how many. No citation. "Historians started writing in Persian instead of Arabic." Which historians? Mongol historians? Western historians? Arabian historians? Persian historians? WHO?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.164.85.11 (talk) 12:11, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Vague Statements 

message: A subsequent search of the inappropriately placed source;
*A Concise History of the Middle East, by Arthur Goldschmidt Jr
reveals no mention of Hulegu's conversion to Buddhism, no mention of syphilis or ruptured aorta. Since there is no page number, this source is unverifiable at the present, therefore the source and information added by the IP should be removed. --Kansas Bear (talk) 23:15, 13 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Please post a note about this over at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:12.239.13.142 reported by User:Loriendrew (Result: )--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(ring-ring) 02:09, 14 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  IP 12.239.13.142's edit warring 

message: Magazine's "300,000 strong" Mongol army is, of course, a wild exaggeration - the strategic supply of such a force would have been impossible - even Hulagu's force crossing the Tigris was - at most - 150,000 or so (a large force in itself - equivalent to the late Roman Empire's entire calvary force/mobile field army). Magazine article is outdated in this aspect as it is directly accepting contemporary reports which always were overwhelmed at the destruction and viciousness of Mongol armies, and inflated their size;  a more reliable source for the estimated size of the invading (combined) army is needed. Additionally, the 300K figure footnote is erroneously attributed to Runciman's book by some editor - I will correct it.104.169.17.116 (talk) 15:08, 9 May 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  dubious statement-Conquest of Syria section 

message: , please provide reliable sources to support your contention that "warlord" is a better WP:FIRSTSENTENCE term for Hulagu than "ruler". As a quick starting point, I will cite: 
* Jackson 2013, "The Mongols and the Islamic World: From Conquest to Conversion", pp. 138–142
* Weatherford 2004, "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World", p. 191
* Atwood 2004, "Encyclopedia of Mongolia and the Mongol Empire", p. 225
Best wishes, ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 20:18, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  Warlord vs ruler 

message: @HistoryofIranYeah I did. I still don’t understand the problem. I just said what the primary source said and added a secondary source which translated it. BulgarChanyu (talk) 21:21, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, this clearly shows that you didn't read. See also WP:PSTS. HistoryofIran (talk) 22:35, 14 April 2024 (UTC)

text: The trouble is that it's completely irrelevant. There are dozens of medieval chronicles with equally incoherent and confused reports as to the origin of the Mongols. Why should the article just describe what one of them says? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:34, 14 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Analysis