42

Three factors. 1) The death of Ögedei Khan forced the hordes rampaging through Europe under Subutai to break off and return for the Kuraltai to choose a successor. Interrupting their hard-earned momentum, and giving the Europeans time to regroup, recover, reflect and prepare, was the deciding factor - also, Talabuga was not the general Subutai was. 2) ...


33

There are a number of tactical and strategic reasons that the Mongols were successful. Core of strong leaders: Not only were the upper levels of military leadership strong, but the mid-level and lower level leadership was also very strong. Flexibility of tactics: They used whatever means necessary to defeat their enemies, including using direct ...


33

Short Answer Generally, no. Literary evidence mostly indicates that Mongol horses were unshod, at least with metal. However, some horses' hooves were shod with skins during the time of Genghis Khan, and there is evidence that metal was sometimes used by Mongols in the west and during Kublai Khan's invasions of Japan. Details During the time of Genghis Khan (...


30

It's precisely because Akhmat Khan retreated. The Mongolian yoke over Russia was underpinned by their ability to compel obedience (i.e. tribute) through the force of arms. Akhmat Khan's retreat destroyed the credibility of this threat. Regardless of the actual circumstances, the fact that the Russians defied him and successfully withstood his retaliation, ...


30

Short Answer An important reason was to destroy those Muslims who opposed the Mongols. This meant that their mosques and Islamic texts were also targeted, especially those of the Isma‘ilis, a Shi‘ite sect which had openly defied the Mongols and which had probably been involved in an attempt on the life Mongke Khan. It should be noted, though, that the ...


29

The source containing the most detail is probably al-Ḥawādit̠ al-ğāmiʿa wa-l-tağārib al-nāfiʿa fī l-miʾa l-sābiʿa, a local history of Baghdad under Mongol rule. It was previously attributed to the librarian and historian Ibn al-Fuwati, but this is now considered erroneous and the author remains unknown. Al-Ḥawādit̠ al-ğāmiʿa reads almost like a newspaper ...


28

There always is a trade-off when occupying someone else's territory: the resources you can extract plus any strategic value versus the resources you need to invest to maintain control. The wooded areas north of the steppe belt were relatively hard to control for the Mongols - e.g. even the 1207 campaign against the "Forest Peoples" had somewhat ...


27

If your textbook indeed says this, it is evidently biased. First of all, these things (the Caliphate, the Mongol Empire, and European empires) belong to very different historical periods, and thus cannot be compared. The "world standards" of what is considered "benevolent" and "tolerant" are changing with time. For example, in ...


20

According to The Field Museum's Genghis Khan online exhibit... Man’s Boots Leather, 19th-20th century, National Museum of Mongolia These centuries-old leather boots are like those worn by warriors in Genghis Khan’s empire and nomadic Mongolians today. For battle, these felt-lined leather boots were often covered with armor plates as well. The turned-up ...


20

This is explained — as it should be — as a frequently used abbreviation, on page 559, at the start of section called "Notes": Abbreviations of principal primary sources used in the notes: […] IAA: Richards, D. S., ed. & trans., The Chronicle of Ibn al-Athir for the Crusading Period from Al-Kamil fi’l-Ta’rikh, Part 3: The Years 589–629/1193–...


19

As interesting as this seems to be, there seems to be not much light available to shine onto this issue, except for the fact that such a man existed, although probably not really in command of that late and lonely mission: Among eight Mongol prisoners captured in Austria during this reconnaissance there was an Englishman. He had once been a Templar, but ...


17

In this period, the Mongols had a nominal strength of around 100,000 to 130,000. According to the Secret History of the Mongols, Ghengis Khan had an army of 105,000 strong by A.D. 1206. This number grew to 129,000 by A.D. 1227, according to Rashid-al-Din_Hamadani in his Jāmiʿ al-tawārīkh. Of the latter figure, 27,000 were new units raised from Manchuria. If ...


15

According to the wikipedia article on the topic: The Mongol vanguard was killed nearly to a man, with Thomas of Split writing: "the Hungarians immediately charged into them and did battle. They cut down a great many of them and pushed the rest back over the bridge, causing them to be drowned in the river." The Hungarians left some soldiers to guard the ...


14

Here is an outline of a few sentences distilled from many long paragraphs at my previously mentioned website. The apparent military superiority of the horse-mounted nomads of central Eurasia during ancient and medieval times was due to: The Scythian, Sarmatian, Alan, Hun, Avar, Magyar, Mongol, et al armies had a tremendous advantage in both strategic and ...


14

Genghis Khan mostly made a one-way trip. There were two main branches of the Silk Road (which wasn't an actual road, but rather an itinerary). One passed north of the Himalayas and one south (or by ship through the Arabian Sea). These were the easiest customary itineraries one could take to cross Asia, as they minimized the amount of mountain-crossing one ...


14

Under the Yuan Dynasty, although the Mongols were the most privileged group politically, they were not the dominant group demographically. In fact, Mongols were an extremely tiny minority in Yuan China. It's essentially impossible for <1% of the population to assimilate the rest - they're way more likely to be assimilated into the majority. As such, it ...


14

Deformed arms? No - the skeletal changes are in the back and shoulders, not the arms, and I'm not comfortable with the term "deformed". That said, were there similar changes to the skeletons of longbow archers and horse archers? Probably. The following quote applies to Hungarian horse archers, using similar bows and suggests that skeletal changes ...


13

(from comment i turned it to answer) Nomadic people could use most of their male population as soldier, and they were full time on horse and using bows regularly. Also bows are good weapon for their tactics that works for battles on open field. Settled people however were mostly busy with agriculture, majority of their foot-soldiers are untrained peasants ...


13

Colours are used in many cultures to denote directions. Chinese and Turkish colour/directions systems are very similar, which is probably not a co-incidence. This picture from a linguistics blog compares them, and notes that the Red Sea and the Black Sea are named for their directions from Turkey. Comments on this question suggest that Belarus (White Russia)...


12

Japan did have naval forces at the time, and they probably fought the Mongolians a few times. The samurai Takezaki Suenaga, a gokenin from Higo in central Kyūshū, was a veteran of both wars. To showcase his valour in battle (to request rewards from the government), Takezaki commissioned the Mōko Shūrai Ekotoba, an illustrated account of the Mongol invasions....


12

The Mongolians originally lived as a tribal culture, and all of their sons would from birth be trained on the horse, bow, and other weapons. As the Khans turned them into a war machine they would continue the training all young mongols received by incorporating tactics, and cavalry formations. "There was no such thing as a civilian population in Mongolia. ...


12

Its fairly simple: There was an arrangement where the Russian Rulers were paying tribute to the Golden Horde since the days of Genghis Khan. This is the international equivalent of "protection money". Either pay them the money, or they'd come raid your territory and take whatever they want (probably quite destructively). In order to get money from someone ...


12

I've never seen the reference to the 'Templar' portion in particular, but an Englishman in the Mongol horde is something I've read. Unfortunately I can't find the book itself and simply have a review of the book to point to: The Tartar Khan's Englishman Ronay's deductions are sound and his theory for the identity of the Englishman is very believable and ...


12

The Mongols were a sort of enlightened people, but they really didn't take lightly any threat to their rule. The Abassids didn't submit to the Mongol terms, during the late negotiation they apparently offended the Mongols. That never ended well for anyone during that time period. They did not need anything else that show the world nothing could stop them ...


12

Your talking about the Golden horde, or the Ulus of Jochi. It was divided between Jochi's sons, but it remained united. It stretched from Central Asia to Eastern Europe. These were the western Mongolian domains, minus the troubled Ilkhanate of Persia. The Ulus of Jochi was its Mongolian name. The "Golden Horde" is what the Russians called it, but it was ...


11

The mongols, when at their best, were unified and powerful. At the time, Russian city-states and kingships had little to no unity, and as the mongols were the top dogs of their time, they easily dispatched the little true resistance they were given. Plus, much of Russian land is plateau. The mongols were given a big boost with this as their horses and ...


11

When most people think of "Huns" and "Mongols", they are thinking of Atilla's empire of the mid 400's and Genghis Khan's Mongolian Empire of the 1200's. Since there's a good 800 years between them, obviously the answer is "no" on that level. It sounds like what you heard is the story of the Yuezhi. As you can probably tell from the name, we know about them ...


10

Gaykhatu Khan's paper money was visually similar to the contemporary Chinese notes. It was an oblong certificate, block printed on possibly papyrus or bark paper. The Islamic creed of Shahada was printed at the top, followed by Gaykhatu's name, as Irinjin Turji, in Arabic. The denomination was printed at the centre of the note, and encircled. Beneath this ...


10

In Russia Mongols usually demanded the cities to surrender. If a city surrendered without a major fight, the Mongols usually would not conduct much of mass killings. They would impose a heavy taxation and require the city to provide troops for their further conquests. Other than that they usually did not intervene much in the internal affairs and customs. ...


Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible