Khaganate Vs. Caliphate

[The Fishman]

How were the Mongol invasions halted in the Middle East? Was the main cause the internal fragmentation of the Mongol states, or were millitary defeats important instead?

[clandestino]

Let's face it only the Egypt evaded Mongol invasion, the rest of the middle east was devastated including Baghdad itself so there wasn't really anyone to halt them ( except the above mentioned Mamluk Egypt ). The question is actually why Mongols were unable to keep control over the conquered territories, do they even wanted to control them or they just invaded in order to loot and intimidate? The even bigger question is why Mongols were unable to keep control over the most of their holdings, eventually most of the conquered land escaped Mongol yoke, most notably China in the east and Russia in the west.

[motiv-8]

The battle of Ayn Jalut in 1260 was helpful, as was the eventual conversion of the Mongols to Islam, which changed them from destructive pagan invaders to a newly-settled ruling class, just as the Turkic nomads had been before them.

[dogukan]

as was the eventual conversion of the Mongols to Islam, which changed them from destructive pagan invaders to a newly-settled ruling class, just as the Turkic nomads had been before them.

Nomadic cultures in time lose their dominance over settled cultures and make a new hybrid culture. Mongols too were assimilated into settled cultures in time.

Besides, their job was generally fighting...so every war, costed them lots of men.

[Carpathian Wolf]

The battle of Ayn Jalut in 1260 was helpful, as was the eventual conversion of the Mongols to Islam, which changed them from destructive pagan invaders to a newly-settled ruling class, just as the Turkic nomads had been before them.

Ayn Jalut was barley a victory. The Egyptian commander even laments that he just got lucky. What stopped the Mongols from taking Egypt among other things was the net work of fortresses in Syria and Levant. Also the Mongols weren't Pagan. They were monotheistic with their religion being Tengrism, Nestorian Christianity and also Buddhism which is the odd ball of the group.

[ivan_the_terrible]

They were monotheistic with their religion being Tengrism, Nestorian Christianity and also Buddhism which is the odd ball of the group.

Yes, that's a good point. Nestorian Christianity was especially popular among the wives of the high-ranking officers, for some reason.

[dezikeizer]

Well a large part of the reason the Mongols lost that battle was because of the infighting among the descendants of Chinngis Khan over the succession. Most of the Mongols forces were elsewhere leaving the remnant forces in the Levant horribly outnumbered. That and the fact that the Egyptian Sultun was a really good general so these forces weren't facing the mediocrities they had before such as the Kwarazimian sultan Muhammed.

[Thalassocrat]

1) The even bigger question is why Mongols were unable to keep control over the most of their holdings, eventually most of the conquered land escaped Mongol yoke, most notably China in the east and Russia in the west.

2)Well a large part of the reason the Mongols lost that battle was because of the infighting among the descendants of Chinngis Khan over the succession. Most of the Mongols forces were elsewhere leaving the remnant forces in the Levant horribly outnumbered. That and the fact that the Egyptian Sultun was a really good general so these forces weren't facing the mediocrities they had before such as the Kwarazimian sultan Muhammed.

1) The Yuan dynasty existed for nearly a century and fell because of the infighting of the mongols. Left with no one to fight, they fought among themselves, returning to the state before they were united by Genghis Khan

2) Helugu did have enough strength to defeat the Mamluks even after Ain Jalut but his cousin Berke had converted to Islam and didn't like him trampling caliphs

[dezikeizer]

1) The Yuan dynasty existed for nearly a century and fell because of the infighting of the mongols. Left with no one to fight, they fought among themselves, returning to the state before they were united by Genghis Khan

2) Helugu did have enough strength to defeat the Mamluks even after Ain Jalut but his cousin Berke had converted to Islam and didn't like him trampling caliphs

I know, I was just explaining as to why the events at Ain Jalut happened. Your right about afterward, but the problem for Mongols after the battle was again that the claimants to the Great Khanate were fighting each other. Thus Helugu was distracted by events elsewhere and didn't come back for the Mamluks.

[Banana Jelly]

Chalifate FTW

[Aetius]

Chalifate FTW

Actually more like FTL.

The Caliphate was burnt to the ground, the Caliph slain by hundreds of Mongol horsemen flattening his body to pulp.

[ivan_the_terrible]

The Mongols killed the last (Abbasid) Caliph. In a really gruesome way too: rolled him up in a rug and rode their horses over him until there was nothing left....

[clandestino]

Heh, I know the answer I was just pointing out what real question should be.

[conon394]

Thus Helugu was distracted by events elsewhere and didn't come back for the Mamluks.

Doesn't really matter the Mongols were not supermen and their logistics always were going to limit their ability to tackle the Mamluks, distracted or not. The Ilkhanate was not always distracted and did return with large armies from time to time, but it could only keep them in Syria and the surrounds briefly (at least as long as they were Mongols with scads of horses and sheep).

[motiv-8]

Doesn't really matter the Mongols were not supermen and their logistics always were going to limit their ability to tackle the Mamluks, distracted or not. The Ilkhanate was not always distracted and did return with large armies from time to time, but it could only keep them in Syria and the surrounds briefly (at least as long as they were Mongols with scads of horses and sheep).

Agreed.. The next time the Mongols were able to penetrate and hold Syria, in 1300, I think it was only for a few days.

[dezikeizer]

Doesn't really matter the Mongols were not supermen and their logistics always were going to limit their ability to tackle the Mamluks, distracted or not. The Ilkhanate was not always distracted and did return with large armies from time to time, but it could only keep them in Syria and the surrounds briefly (at least as long as they were Mongols with scads of horses and sheep).

True, but by then they had sat on their laurels long enough, and fought the other Mongol Khanates long enough that they didn't have enough strength to hold their gains. Their best shot at doing so was before the death of Mongke(sp?) Khan, or at least if Helagu hadn't sent the bulk of his forces east to fight the other khanates.

[motiv-8]

The destruction of almost an entire Mongol force, for the first time in Western history, was "barely a victory?" Hm, okay. Luck is variable component in many a battle, that doesn't take away from the significance. Fortified positions certainly helped, yes, but so did the increased military power of the Mameluk state as well as the political fragmentation of the Mongols. Another, smaller Mongol army was sent in 1263 and was turned away as well.

And yes, I apologize, Tengriism, not paganism. My mistake, I lumped animism in with paganism. That doesn't change the actual point, which is that the Mongols became settled as a Muslim ruling class in Central Asia and abandoned their nomadic ways, which is what ultimately stopped the penetration into the Middle East. It was shortly after the conversion of the Ilkhanate to Islam that the Treaty of Aleppo was signed.

[Carpathian Wolf]

Yes I think it was Baibars that lamented over his "victory" in that it was so close and was only won due to the numerical advantage.

This also wasn't the first defeat by Mongols in the western world.

[motiv-8]

The commander of the majority of the Mameluk force at Ayn Jalut wasn't Baibars, it was Qutuz. Baibars indeed barely made it out due to the tactics Qutuz employed, ie using Baibars as a decoy, but Qutuz spearheaded the destruction of the Mongol army. Also, the two forces were approximately even.

I didn't merely say defeat in my post, I said "destruction of almost an entire Mongol army", which is what happened an Ayn Jalut. Despite that, I can't think of a significant defeat inflicted upon the Mongols at any point until Kulikovo, so you'll have to indulge me.

[Carpathian Wolf]

The commander of the majority of the Mameluk force at Ayn Jalut wasn't Baibars, it was Qutuz. Baibars indeed barely made it out due to the tactics Qutuz employed, ie using Baibars as a decoy, but Qutuz spearheaded the destruction of the Mongol army. Also, the two forces were approximately even.

Ah yea I always confuse the two for some reason. In any case he wrote something along the lines that how could he consider such a victory as glorious when he only won due to numbers and how the Mongol warriors were better than his in actuality. I'm trying to find it now but it escapes me.

I didn't merely say defeat in my post, I said "destruction of almost an entire Mongol army", which is what happened an Ayn Jalut. Despite that, I can't think of a significant defeat inflicted upon the Mongols at any point until Kulikovo, so you'll have to indulge me.

Well it wasn't really a "Mongol army" more like a detachment but I know what you mean.

I don't know if it was a significant defeat but Phillipe writes about a victory over the Mongols by the King of the Vlachs in 1243