View source for Talk:Bayezid I

{{talkheader}}
{{WikiProject banner shell|class=C|listas=Bayezid 01|blp=n|1=
{{WikiProject Biography|military-work-group=y|military-priority=Low|royalty-work-group=y|royalty-priority=Low}}
{{WikiProject Turkey|importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Middle Ages|importance=High}}
{{WikiProject Former countries|Ottoman=yes|Ottoman-importance=Mid}}
{{WikiProject Greece|importance=Low|topic=history|byzantine-task-force=yes}}
{{WikiProject Military history|Ottoman-task-force=yes|Medieval-task-force=yes|Biography=yes|b1=no|b2=yes|b3=yes|b4=yes|b5=yes}}
}}

== Wallachia invasion ==
I made a minor correction, there were no "Romanians" back then. Is a common mistake in history to identify old people with modern nations. There was no national conciousness of this kind in the middle ages.
:depends on what you are talking about - both Hungarian and Wallachian had very strong attitudes of their national identity and defending their 'motherlands' [[Special:Contributions/50.111.63.192|50.111.63.192]] ([[User talk:50.111.63.192|talk]]) 14:00, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

== Comment ==
In the section on Beyazid in [[Ottoman Empire]], i've NPOVed the portion on nature of Murad's death and outcome of the battle of Nicopolis (AKA Nikopol, Bulgaria). I edited only that article, for the moment, since it is clearly in progress (and the contributor may be about to review transcriptions or wording for reconsideration) and since there are ''two'' articles at hand that contradict the battle part. 

I am also adding this note to talk pages of  [[Ottoman Empire]], [[Beyazid I]], and [[Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor]].

If the [[Ottoman Empire]] contributor defends her/his version with sources, IMO others should also bring forward sources, and there should be discussion, in case the factual dispute is not resolved, about how to lessen the burden of NPOVing the various articles affected - e.g., could all three articles say "see [[Death of Murad and Battle of Nicopolis]] for controversial matters relevant to this section"? -- [[User:Jerzy|Jerzy]] 20:40, 1 Oct 2003 (UTC)

==Conqueror of Constantinople?==
Beyazid I didn't conquer Constantinople, did he? <small>&mdash;''The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by'' [[User:The Phoenix|The Phoenix]] ([[User talk:The Phoenix|talk]]&nbsp;•&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/The Phoenix|contribs]]) {{{2|}}}.</small><!--Inserted with Template:Unsigned-->
:No.  He besieged it after the Byzanyine Emperor Manuel II escaped from semi-captivity at the Ottoman court in Edirne (or Adrianople, depending on whether you use the Turkish or Greek name).  Mehmed II actually took the city in 1453 <small>&mdash;''The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by'' [[User:210.153.95.101|210.153.95.101]] ([[User talk:210.153.95.101|talk]]&nbsp;•&nbsp;[[Special:Contributions/210.153.95.101|contribs]]) {{{2|}}}.</small><!--Inserted with Template:Unsigned-->

== Info-less box ==
Such a very big box! So little information in all that blank space! And not even a caption to tell the reader who painted the (Venetian?) portrait, which dates long after Bayazid's time, apparently. Is it not actually of [[Bayazid II]], patron of Western culture?--[[User:Wetman|Wetman]] 04:23, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
:This is a real problem, Wetman, that some editors deem it helpful to illustrate articles about medieval rulers with modern images, without providing any credits. Those who want an authentic portrait of a 15th-century sultan ought to check [[:Image:Gentile Bellini 003.jpg|Gentile's painting]] of Mehmed II. The info-box is supremely redundant. --[[User:Ghirlandajo|<span style="color:#FC4339;">Ghirla</span>]] [[User_talk:Ghirlandajo|<sup style="color:#C98726;">-трёп-</sup>]] 07:10, 25 September 2006 (UTC)

== 1391, wrong ==
No this is wrong, bayezid di not lay siege in 1391, I have this book:

Mango, Cyril. The Oxford History of Byzantium. 1st ed. New York: Oxford UP, 2002 

To prove otherwise.[[User:Tourskin|Tourskin]] 11:45, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

== Citation needed? ==
"and prevented Bayezid from conquering the country" - What citation is needed for that ? Did Wallachia get conquered by Bayezid ? Isn't that common knowledge ? --[[User:Venatoreng|Venatoreng]] 09:24, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

== Two sons named Süleyman ==
In the section '''Marriages and progeny''' there are two sons named Süleyman. I think both refer to the same person namely Çelebi Süleyman who was the de facto ruler of Rumelia and and was killed in 1411. [[User:Nedim Ardoğa|Nedim Ardoğa]] ([[User talk:Nedim Ardoğa|talk]]) 08:53, 28 July 2010 (UTC)
:One of the two Süleymen's delated. [[User:Nedim Ardoğa|Nedim Ardoğa]] ([[User talk:Nedim Ardoğa|talk]]) 14:50, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

== Clarification ==
What is the word "false" supposed to mean/imply/suggest in this sentence?<br />
'''( False )''' Mustafa Çelebi, Sultan of Rumelia (d. 1422) - son of Devlet Shah Hatun.<br />
A clarification is needed. Thanks. --[[User:Kansas Bear|Kansas Bear]] ([[User talk:Kansas Bear|talk]]) 22:12, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

== In Fiction section ==
Shouldn't the "In Fiction" section be located at the very end of the article, especially after the legacy and Marriages section? --[[User:Kansas Bear|Defensor Ursa]] 22:33, 4 August 2012 (UTC)

== Captive painting is not truthful ==
[[File:Chlebowski-Bajazyt w niewoli.jpg|thumb|right|75px]]
Bayezid is about 30 years younger than Timur but in this painting he seems wide older than Timur. --[[User:Kamuran otukenli|Kamuran Ötükenli]] ([[User talk:Kamuran otukenli|talk]]) 09:19, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
:Well, it's lovely art and might get included for portraying the historical presentation of Baye's captivity, but you're right that that particular issue should be noted if we include it, either in the caption or in a {{tl|efn}} footnote linked from it.&nbsp;—&nbsp;[[User talk:LlywelynII|<span style="text-shadow:#BBBBBB 0.1em 0.1em 0.1em; class=texhtml">Llywelyn<span style="color: Gold;">II</span></span>]] 21:32, 12 October 2024 (UTC)

== Date of Birth ==
Why is the date of birth 1354 while on the wikis of other languages (e.g. Greek) the date of birth is 1360?  <!-- Template:Unsigned IP --><small class="autosigned">—&nbsp;Preceding [[Wikipedia:Signatures|unsigned]] comment added by [[Special:Contributions/155.207.131.148|155.207.131.148]] ([[User talk:155.207.131.148#top|talk]]) 13:01, 11 December 2017 (UTC)</small> <!--Autosigned by SineBot-->

== lost material? incomplete? ==
" Constantine of Ostrovica wrote neither about the cell, nor a''bout the nudity of Bayezid's wife'' ..." - where did this come from? There was no earlier statement about any nudity. Has something been lost inadvertently through copyediting? [[Special:Contributions/50.111.63.192|50.111.63.192]] ([[User talk:50.111.63.192|talk]]) 13:57, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
:Two of the illustrations, the earliest before 1561, show this, & it is certainly part of the legend. It should be added, with refs. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 04:32, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
::The entire Bayezid in Captivity section is confusing, irrelevant, and lacks any authenticity, and does not deserve to remain on the page which is only a general overview of his rule. It does not deserve to go into so much detail on one specific event which repeatedly contradicts itself. [[Special:Contributions/67.237.189.189|67.237.189.189]] ([[User talk:67.237.189.189|talk]]) 04:14, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
:::It could be improved by rewriting, but should ''not'' just be cut. The "event" lasted over a year, the last of his life. It would be useful if the consensus view of modern historians was made clearer, but the legend needs to be here either way.  It was pretty much the most famous aspect of his life in Europe. It is not surprising if Turkish writers downplay or deny this humiliating episode. [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 04:32, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
::::I have no issue with discussing in depth Bayezid's time in captivity, or even saying that he was treated poorly. However, at the very least the explicitness of the details can be toned down slightly and the image can be removed. There is no need for this article to be so explicit for no real reason, and it could just as easily say that Timur treated him poorly without a few small details which, I must stress, have no authenticity. Fine, keep the narratives themselves, but those certain details should be removed. [[Special:Contributions/67.237.189.189|67.237.189.189]] ([[User talk:67.237.189.189|talk]]) 04:42, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
{{multiple image| total_width = 400
 | image1 = Burton Camel Train.gif
 | caption1 = Burton's takhtrawan
 | image2 = The Emperor Aurangzeb Carried on a Palanquin MET tr235.2003.jpeg
 | caption2 =Aurangzeb's
}}
{{od}} I'll just note this is ''still'' a problem (I came to the talk page for the ''exact'' same reason as 50.111...), as was 67.237...'s attitude. Bayezid's captivity has been the single most {{sc|[[wp:notable]]}} aspect of his life to Western culture and even one of the main points of Timur's. ''Of course'' we should talk about it and ''of course'' we should present it more clearly. Neither the images nor the explicitness should be 'toned down' (cf. {{sc|[[wp:dontcensor]]}}). The nudity of his wife while serving was an important part of the legend, even if the legend was false. It should be stated in the running text, not hidden in a caption, and{{mdash}}if it doesn't match the more important written accounts{{mdash}}the image is if anything too demure for what was being described.

Note also that this article seems to treat the sultan's "iron cell" as a byproduct of poetic excess that captured the early modern imagination too completely. In fact, at least according to an [[:ar:معركة_أنقرة#الدمار_والانقسام_في_الأناضول|extensive section of the Arab wiki's lengthy and well-sourced treatment of the Battle of Ankara]], the actual issue was with mistranslation of the contemporary witnesses' account of the sultan being carried in a [[:wikt:takhtrawan|takhtrawan]] ([[:ar:تختروان|تختروان]], [[:ar:ملف:Dqm0oTbXQAEc8HN.jpg|its pic]]) that allowed him to pull a curtain, shade, or shutter between him and his captors. There was apparently some overlap in Turkish &c. description of that royal litter and the words used to describe cages. (Note also that the Arabic articles{{mdash}}and the OED treatment of same term in translation{{mdash}}deal with TRs as only covering covered litters borne between two camels or mules, but the same Persian term seems to get used to describe the early [[Mughal Empire|Mughal]]s' open litters borne by teams of porters. It's unclear whether the Arab wiki knows that and is certain the Bayezid accounts are talking about the animal-borne kind or whether they're just using the more common modern meaning of a somewhat ambiguous historical term.)&nbsp;—&nbsp;[[User talk:LlywelynII|<span style="text-shadow:#BBBBBB 0.1em 0.1em 0.1em; class=texhtml">Llywelyn<span style="color: Gold;">II</span></span>]] 22:14, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
::Yes, why don't you have a go? [[User:Johnbod|Johnbod]] ([[User talk:Johnbod|talk]]) 02:47, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

== Date of birhts ==

{{ping|Sira Aspera}} you edit a lot below. Are those date of birhts of sehzades based on the article or on your sources? TDV doesn't mention these birth dates. [[User:Beshogur|Beshogur]] ([[User talk:Beshogur|talk]]) 09:37, 25 May 2024 (UTC)

== Why use the word "Thunderbolt"? ==

Bayezid I is not worthy of any praise, in fact this character unworthy to be known as a "thunderbolt".

12:07, 29 December 2024 (UTC)12:07, 29 December 2024 (UTC)~~\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\12:07, 29 December 2024 (UTC)12:07, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[[User:Truffle457|Truffle457]] ([[User talk:Truffle457|talk]]) 12:07, 29 December 2024 (UTC)\\\\\

:Rv do you decide who's worthy of what title? [[User:Beshogur|Beshogur]] ([[User talk:Beshogur|talk]]) 15:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC)