Talk:Battle of Kulikovo

message: Russian word "kulik" does not mean snipe, but shorebird or wader. Thus calling this battle Battle on the Snipes' Field is incorrect. You may as well call it Shorebird Field, Wader Field, or use many other shorebird names (Godwit, Woodcock, Sanpiper, etc.). The battle is not well known in the west, so calling it Battle of the Snipe Field only adds to confusion. Vitoldus44 18:46, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: That is ok. The battle itself carries no particular value. It was just one of the battles during which kniazes of Rus fought either each other or the Tatars. It carries no spiritual value as well and the Rus was not united in the afterwards. So it is impossible to add anymore of confusion. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 14:12, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: '''Incorrect translation removed:'''

message: The battle of Kulikovo was not the first Russian victory over the Golden Horde as it is often claimed. In 1378 or 1379 the Moskovites defeated an incursion force led by Begich at Voja or Vodja river. That Tatar failure lead Mamai into gathering a much larger punitive force and meet combined Russian forces at Kulikovo in 1380. Vitoldus44 18:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As in my previuos comment, the whole history that is tight to the Moscow state is one big confusion. The yoke itself was not present, but rather was used to justify whole spectrum of wrong doings by kniazes. They simply robbed their own polpulation and then were telling that it was a yoke by the Golden Horde. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 14:20, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Baseless conspirologist crap. 95.32.182.176 (talk) 11:36, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

text: term Russians could not be refered to all lived in Modern western Russia. Im sure that term Russians(Russkije) did not even existed at that time. Term Rus, Russes can be refered to subject of Kiyevian Russ. And even if they where duchies rulled by Russian speaking rullers, no one told that citizens were Russians and that people even spoke in Slavian language.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.109.250.204 (talk) 18:26, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: '''A preceding battle is missing'''

message: I have read that Genovese infantry (pikemen?) were hired by the Tatars and formed center of the Tatar battle order. Interestingly, some source mention the Genovese and other do not. I wonder if there are any Italian sources about this battle? Vitoldus44 18:59, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: this Italian source http://www.mondimedievali.net/medioevorusso/battaglia.htm does mention that Genovese infantry indeed formed the Tartar center, but it doesn't say what arms they used. I will translate the sentence where their presence is mentioned: "Il grande contingente genovese a piedi, che avrebbe dovuto affiancare la terribile cavalleria mongola con gli archi lunghi."= The great Genovese contingent, which should have flanked the terrible mongol cavalry with their Long Bows. (as my Italian is not perfect I'm unsure if the mongols or the Genovese are meant by their...) JHope, I could help. --noclador 17:15, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: '''Genovese infantry'''

message: Russian affairs are "too west" for me, but I heard that some scholars claim that the Battle of Kulikovo didn't happen or at least it was a trivial incident because it was recorded only in a Russian chronicle and diplomatic documents nerver mentioned to the battle. --Nanshu 00:30, 21 May 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: In fact, in the time when Russia was under Mongols, even few west chronicle mention Russia, no words about russian events. But if you will study the influence of the Battle of Kulikovo, you will drop this claim of "some scholars". Alexandre Koriakine 14:21, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Old talk

message: But you can find the info of the Battle in the Timuride hystoriography as well as in polish and Lithuanian history. Though it seems that it was "too east" for the french and germans and obviously none of them were at the Kulikovo to observe the Battle. But there are other interesting ideas about this big event in the Russian hystory. Some evidents say that Prince Dmitry was supported by Tokhtamysh and the Golden Horde establishment while Mamay was blamed in the Horde as the usurper and sort of outlawed there. And Mamay was supported by the Lithuanian Grand Duke Yagailo and the Genoesemoney and forces. So the importance of this event for the Russian hystory may well differ from the view of the world hystory, the Horde hystory or the history of the East Europe. Regards,  Dizzie.
>>for the french and germans and obviously none of them were at the Kulikovo to observe the Battle
The Genoese were. There were Genoese mercineries from the Genoese Crimean colonies fighting for the Tatars. Gaidash
Mamai was not a head of Golden Horde, he was rebelled military general opportunist using the split between Golden Horde hairs in his advantage, which had gathered quite significant forces and money in his hands with support of Genoese Traders from Crimea. He was in war with Tohtamich the legitimate khan of the Golden Horde, so Mamai cannot be called the head of Goldern Horde, or having any Golden Horde status as he him self was in war with Golden Horde, and his armies were heavily packed with mercenaries. Armancho
I'm sorry: "Mamai or Mamay was a powerful military commander of the Blue Horde in the 1370s" this is the text from "Mamai" article. And here I read that Mamai was the military leader of Golden Horde. What is correct version? I'm confused 124.32.179.154 00:23, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe there was a split in the Gloden Horde into other ones such as the Blue which actually meant the western. The Golden Horde itself was still remaining as the main. Mamai or Mamay (whichever you like) tried to gain the ownership of the Golden Horde to have the influence over some other ones. He was not technically was a leader of the Golden Horde, but in the Soviet history he was portrayed as such. That history never showed a political analysis of Russian neighbors, but only from the Russian perspective and assumption. Aleksandr Grigoryev (talk) 14:43, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: How true were Vandals for we know of them only from the Romans?

message: Argue about the factual content by all means, but would it not be a good idea to ensure that the article is written in grammatically accurate English first of all?  The text is riddled with examples of the characteristic errors that speakers of Slavonic languages make in using the definite and indefinite articles (including the omitted article)in English.  Also errors of sentence structure and phraseology are present.  
I have spent time on so many occasions in the past trying to render articles into correct English that I don't feel like tackling this one! 86.158.93.52 (talk) 18:06, 2 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: English Grammar - not!

message: http://english.pravda.ru/main/18/87/347/16170_Kulikovo.html
  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.7.75.77 (talk) 00:35, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Link to article in Pravda on this battle 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Battle of Kulikovo. 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/20070928130530/http://www.kulpole.ru/english.php?ld=history to http://www.kulpole.ru/english.php?ld=history
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:59, 28 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified