Talk:Battle of Samara Bend

message: Forgive my ignorance but the idea of there being 46,000 Mongol deaths seems rather ludicrous considering that the entire Mongol army (In the whole world) was about 150,000 at the time and all other battles on Subedei's trek around the caspian had at most 40,000 i.e. Kalka river. Surely there's been a bit of exaggeration?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.21.27.167 (talk) 19:49, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Subotai and Jebe's "reconnaissance in force" through the Caucasus and around the Caspian had about 25,000 men, maximum. Jenghiz's forces of "pure" Mongol tumens numbered around 200,000. However, the Mongols had a (revolutionary) professional army, and quality, not quantity, was the reason for their success on the battlefield. HammerFilmFan (talk) 03:52, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

text: Possibly this underestimating of Bulgar and overstating of Mongol casualities is due to the oral form of the history, practised in the region that time. --Üñţïf̣ļëŗ (see also:ә? Ә!) 20:27, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

text: Sorry, anon ip, but that's rubbish about the quality of the Bolgar army at this point in history. Additionally, the Bolgars were not singled out for any special treatment - they were treated the same as all adversaries - submit, pay tribute and survive - resist, and be destroyed. HammerFilmFan (talk) 03:47, 30 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Casualties

message: Since when did Ibn al-Asir become representative of bulgar "local oral traditions" ?? The only written account for this event is from his writings and has nothing to do with "local oral traditions". Note section is total rubbish, well, though not much worse than the rest of this "article"  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.154.63.92 (talk) 07:58, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Local Oral Traditions?? 

message: I am adding material to this article after consultation with Professors David Morgan (author of The Mongols) and Peter Jackson (author of many books on medieval history) - John Chambers passed away May 2012 and was therefore unable for discussion on the subject.  I have several sources to add and some vital corrections to be made.  Please be patient until this is completed.  Thank you. HammerFilmFan (talk) 01:50, 20 October 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  work in progress 

message: As stated in the article, the ENTIRE historical event of this "battle" is the very scrappy account by al-Athir, and the explanation of the "4000" by professor Jackson is noted.  I am reverting, but will make a note of your cite elsewhere in the article.  To date, the numbers and casualties are unknown. WHAT IS KNOWN is that after this event, the Mongols were still able to attack and inflict a huge defeat on the eastern Cumans, even killing their king (khagan) - hardly possible with only 4,000 "survivors."  Samara Bend was probably little more than a skirmish, much inflated over time via oral traditions. The Mongol generals just decided they had much more profitable work to do elsewhere, and the time limits of their probe may also have been a factor in leaving the Volga Bolgars for later.HammerFilmFan (talk) 10:17, 18 November 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  De Hartog's version of events superseded by more modern works 

message: Why does it say that the victory was due to Bulgars and Tatars, when Tatars were not an independent group, rather numerous subjugated people, some loyal to Bulgaria, others to the Mongol horde? - Jotaro97
:This is HammerFilmFan (not logged in) - the user has been changing various statements in the article contrary to what the sources stated. I have reverted. I will be keeping a closer watch and will open an ANI case against him if he does it a third time.104.169.39.45 (talk) 12:02, 21 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bulgar-Tatar victory? 

message: Using unscholarly sources, such as journalists' confusing of facts in online articles to garner 'attention,' and the use of the Batu-led MUCH-LATER invasion of the Volga Bolgars after the death of Jenghiz, are not relevant to THIS article - and there are no viable "Chinese sources" whatever that refers to, ANON's - the entirety of this incident in the historical record is listed - probably less even than that of Spartacus in Roman history (which is extremely sparse).  There have been so many undocumented off-the-fly edits that happened while I was away and even the efforts of other professional ed's such as Kansas Bear (much thanks!) to keep this article on the track that Mr. Chambers and Mr. Jackson aided me and others so much to produce, and the original article was dreck.  This may seem a tad WP:OWN but nationalist and jingoistic edits and discarding so much work on your whims is not appreciated.  I stated years ago to TALK about it first. Okey-dokey?  Sawright? Sawright. HammerFilmFan (talk) 01:27, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
thread_title:  PLEASE - DISCUSS changes here before changing