Military Review

Empire of Genghis Khan and Khorezm. The beginning of the confrontation

At the beginning of the XIII century Khorezm was rightfully considered one of the most powerful and richest states in the world. Its rulers had at their disposal a large and battle-hardened army, conducted an aggressive foreign policy, and it was hard to believe that their state would soon fall under the blow of the Mongols.

Empire of Genghis Khan and Khorezm. The beginning of the confrontation

Khorezmshah with his retinue. 13th century Persian miniature

State of Khorezmshahs

The name “Khorezm” is very ancient, known from the 8th – 7th centuries BC. There are several versions of its origin. According to the first, this is “feeding land”, supporters of the second believe that this is “low” land, and S.P. Tolstov believed that it should be translated as "Country of Hurrit" - Hvarizam.

The armies of many conquerors passed through these lands, the last were the Seljuks, whose powers included the territory of Khorezm. But the last of the Great Seljuks, Ahmad Sanjar, died in 1156. The weakened state, no longer able to keep the outskirts submissive, crumbled to pieces.

Ahmad Sanjar, portrait on a Turkmen banknote in denominations of 5 manat

In 1157, Khorezm gained independence, and a dynasty came to power, the penultimate representative of which destroyed the country, and the latter fought like a hero (and became the national hero of four countries), but, alas, came to power too late.

The lands subject to the Khorezmshahs then extended from the Aral Sea to the Persian Gulf, and from the Pamir to the Iranian Highlands.

Khorezm before the invasion of the Mongols

The extremely advantageous geographical position guaranteed a stable income from transit trade. Samarkand, Bukhara, Gurganj, Ghazni, Tabriz and other cities were famous for their artisans. Agriculture flourished in numerous fertile valleys and in an oasis in the lower reaches of the Amu Darya. The Aral Sea was rich in fish. Huge herds and flocks of cattle grazed in the boundless steppe. The Arab geographer Yakut al-Hamawi, who visited Khorezm shortly before the Mongol invasion, wrote:
“I don’t think that somewhere in the world there were vast lands wider than Khorezmian and more populated, despite the fact that the inhabitants were accustomed to a difficult life and contentment for a few. Most villages of Khorezm are cities with markets, living supplies and shops. How rare are villages in which there is no market. All this with general security and complete serenity. "

Victories and Challenges

The state of Khorezmshahs reached its heyday under Al Al-Din Mohammed II, who successively defeated the Gurtsky Sultanate and the Karakit Khanate, after which he appropriated the title of "Second Alexander" (Macedonian).

At his court, hostages from the sons of the rulers of neighboring countries constantly lived until 27. In 1217, he even tried to lead his army to Baghdad, but because of the early winter, his army was unable to overcome the mountain passes. And then there was alarming information about the appearance of the Mongol troops at the eastern borders of Khorezm, and Muhammad was not up to Baghdad.

The first capital of Muhammad II was Gurganj (now the Turkmen city of Köneurgench), but then he moved it to Samarkand.

Dinar Muhammad II

However, all this was only a beautiful external wall covering an unsightly picture of internal discord and disorder.

One of the problems of Khorezm was a kind of dual power. Terrible from the Khorezmshah, Muhammad was forced to reckon with the opinion of his mother, Terken-Khatyn, a representative of the influential kind of “ashira,” whose men held senior military and administrative posts.

“Most of the emirs of the state were of her kind”
- wrote Mohammed al-Nasawi.

One of the few women in the Muslim world, she had a lakab (exalting the epithet as part of the name) Khudavand-i jahan - “Lord of the world.” She also had her own personal tugra (a graphic symbol, which is both a seal and a coat of arms) for decrees: "The protector of peace and faith, Great Terken, mistress of women of both worlds." And his motto: “I seek protection only from Allah!”

When Muhammad moved his capital to Samarkand (escaped from strict mother?), Terken-Khatyn stayed in Gurganj, where she had her own yard, no worse and no less than her son, and continued to actively intervene in all affairs of the state. An-Nasawi maintained that if two different decrees were received from her and from the Khorezmashah on the same case, the one that came later was considered “correct”.

Turken-Khatyn hated the oldest son of Muhammad - Jalal ad-Din, who was born from the Turkmen woman Ai-Chichek - so much so that when, during the Mongol invasion, the eunuch Badr ad-din Khilal offered her to run to the new Khorezmshah, she replied:

“How can I go down to become dependent on the mercy of my son Ai-Chichek and be under his protection? Even Genghis Khan’s captivity and my current humiliation and shame are better for me than that. ”

(Shihab ad-Din Muhammad al-Nasawi, "The Biography of Sultan Jalal ad-Din Mankburn.")

As a result of the intrigues of Terken-Khatyn, the youngest son of Muhammad, Qutb ad-Din Uzlag Shah, was declared the heir to the throne, whose only merit was an origin from the same kind as herself. And Jalal ad-Din, who demonstrated great military successes from a young age, received the Afghan Gazna, and his father did not let him go there, because he did not trust and was afraid of a conspiracy.

Jalal ad-Din, modern drawing

An alarming sign for a historian studying Khorezm in the 12th-13th centuries is certainly information about the army of this state, which was now based on mercenaries - Turkmens and Kangles. Such troops can still be used in conquering wars with weaker opponents, but it is hardly reasonable to rely on them in the event of a severe war with a strong enemy on their territory. They have nothing to protect in a foreign land for them, and there is no hope of rich prey.

Another sign of tension is the uprisings in Samarkand and in the recently annexed Bukhara. And in Isfahan (western Iran) and Rey (northern Iran) there were constant clashes between the Shafiites and Hanafites. And here still in the east the previously weak and fragmented nomadic tribes came into motion, surprising and frightening the neighbors with their victories. So far, the Mongols fought in the east, but it was clear to all more or less intelligent people that someday they would move west.

On the eve of the disaster

The first diplomatic contacts between the Khorezmians and the Mongols were established in 1215, when the ambassadors of Muhammad II visited Genghis Khan on the eve of the assault on Beijing, and could be convinced of the power of his army.

The Mongols occupy the middle capital of the Jin Empire, the city of Zhongdu (future Beijing). Contemporary wall painting. Genghis Khan Memorial in Ordos (PRC)

There was no common border between Khorezm and the state of Chinggis, and the conqueror assured the ambassadors that he was not seeking war with his western neighbors, counting on good-neighborly relations and mutually beneficial trade. But, almost immediately, he launched an attack on the west - not yet on Khorezm, on its neighbors. Subedei set off on a campaign against the Desht-i-Kipchak tribes, Jochi opposed the Tumats and Kirghiz, and Jebe attacked the Kara-Khitan. By the end of 1217, they were all crushed, and now a clash of young (state of the Mongols) and old (Khorezm) predators became inevitable.

About Subedai and Jab on behalf of Jamuhi, it is said in “The Secret Legend of the Mongols”:
“My anda Temujin was going to feed four dogs with human meat and put them on an iron chain ... These four dogs:

Their foreheads are of bronze,
And the snouts are steel chisels.
Shiloh is their language
And the heart is iron.
With a whip they serve swords
Eating pretty dew to them,
Riding in the winds.
Human meat - their grub marching,
In the days of slaughter, human meat is eaten.
They lowered them from the chain. Isn't it a joy?
They waited for a long time on a leash!
Yes, then, running up, they swallow saliva.
You ask, what is the name of those four dogs?
The first couple - Jebe with Kublai,
The second pair is Jelme with Subetai. "

The name of the first of these “dogs” is Jirgoadai, and Jabe (“Arrow”) is the nickname that he received from Temujin for wounding him with an archery in 1201. He was one of the Temniks who led the Mongols during the battle with the Russian princes on Kalka. We even better know the Subaean, who, after Kalki, came to Russia with Batu Khan. Jalme, whose name in this text is next to the name of Subadeus, is the elder brother of this great commander. But Khubilai, who is mentioned here, is not the grandson of Genghis Khan, but the Mongol commander from among the conquerors of the nukers.

“The Secret Legend of the Mongols”, table of contents

"The Secret Legend of the Mongols." Genghis Khan's question about pleasure and the answer to it

At the beginning of 1218, Genghis Khan sent his ambassadors to Khorezm, who conveyed to Muhammad II a very friendly, but at the same time, a provocative message:
“It’s not hidden from me how great your work is, I also know what you have achieved in your power. I learned that your possession is vast and your power has spread to most countries of the world, and I consider maintaining peace with you as one of my duties. You are like my dearest son to me. It is not hidden for you that I took possession of China and the neighboring countries of the Turks and their tribes have already submitted to me. And you know better than all people that my country is a mass of troops and mines of silver and there are so many (riches) in it that it is unnecessary to look for some other. And if you consider it possible to open a path for visiting merchants on both sides, it would (would) be for the benefit of all and for the common good. ”

Addressing Muhammad as a "son", albeit the "dearest", Genghis actually offered him to admit himself to be his vassal. Of course, this letter provoked the wrath of Muhammad.

This was followed by the so-called “Otrar disaster”: Genghis Khan sent a trade caravan in which 450 people were accompanying 500 loaded camels was plundered by the governor of the Sultan Kair Khan, who accused the merchants of spying.

An-Nasavi claims that the Khorezmshah merely ordered him to detain the caravan workers until further notice, but he exceeded his authority, and his main motive was elementary robbery:
“Then the sultan allowed him to take precautionary measures against them, until he makes his decision, he crossed all limits (of what is permitted), exceeded his rights and seized (of these merchants). After that, there was no trace left of them and no news was heard. And the aforementioned single-handedly disposed of that numerous goods and folded goods, out of malice and treachery. "

And here is Ibn al-Asir in the Complete Code stories"Actually declares Muhammad II an accomplice in this crime:
“Their king, called Genghis Khan ... sent a group of merchants with a large number of ingots of silver, beaver furs and other goods to the cities of Maverannahra, Samarkand and Bukhara, so that they would buy clothes for him to dress. They arrived in one of the cities of the Turks, called Otrar, and he is the extreme limit of the Khorezmshah possessions. There he had a governor. When this group (of merchants) arrived there, he sent to Khorezmshah, informing him of their arrival and announcing that they have valuable. Khorezmshah sent (a messenger) to him, ordering them to be killed, to take everything that they had, and send to him. He killed them and sent what they had, but there was a lot of all (good). When (their goods) arrived at Khorezmshah, he divided them between the merchants of Bukhara and Samarkand, taking the eighth part for himself. ”

Rashid ad-Din:
“Khorezmshah, not obeying the instructions of Genghis Khan and not delving deeply, gave an order allowing the shedding of their blood and the seizure of their property. He did not understand that with the permission of their murder and (seizure of their) property, life will be forbidden (his own and the life of his subjects).
Kayr Khan, according to the order of the (Sultan) killed them, but (thereby) he ruined the whole world and dispossessed the whole people. "

It is possible that the scouts of the Mongols really came with the merchants, but this, of course, did not give grounds for open robbery and, especially, murder. However, the temptation to “warm your hands” was too great.

After that, the ambassadors of Genghis Khan came to the Khorezmshah, who delivered the letter of the conqueror. According to the testimony of Ibn al-Asir, it said:
“You killed my people and took their good. Get ready for war! I am coming to you with an army that you cannot resist ”... When Khorezmshah heard it (content), he ordered the ambassador to be killed, and he was killed. He ordered those who accompanied him to cut off his beards and returned Genghis Khan to their master. ”

Khorezmshah did exactly what Genghis Khan wanted: now he had a legitimate and understandable reason for the war for all his subjects: the killings of the ambassadors were not forgiven by the Mongols.

Gumilev once wrote that diplomats of all the nations of the world should erect a monument to Genghis Khan, since it was he and his heirs who taught everyone the principle of personal inviolability of ambassadors. Before his conquests, their murder was considered a matter of routine, and the revenge of the Mongols for their death was considered literally as savagery and a sign of uncivilization.

Mongolian ambassadors in China

Genghis Khan also had another reason for the war, already personal: his brother Khasar, after a quarrel with the khan, migrated to the possession of Muhammad, where he was killed by someone. Relations between the brothers were very tense, even hostile, but nobody canceled the blood feud in Mongolia.

Monument to Genghis Khan in Mongolia. The tallest equestrian statue in the world

Battle of the Turgai Valley

In 1218, reconnaissance was conducted in battle. Formally, the army of the Mongols was led by the eldest son of Genghis Jochi, but Subadei had real power over the army.

Subeday. Chinese drawing

Pursuing the Merkits running before them, the Mongols entered the borders of Khorezm. There were only 20-25 thousand people, Muhammad led the army to 60 thousand.

As usual, before the battle, the Mongols tried to enter into negotiations. The scheme was standard, it will be applied many more times: Jochi said that he had no order to fight with the Khorezm army, the purpose of his campaign was to defeat the Merkits, and in order to maintain friendship with Muhammad, he was ready to give all the booty captured by his army. Muhammad answered in much the same way as many others answered the Mongols, with the condition of local specificity, of course:
"If Genghis Khan ordered you not to engage in a battle with me, then Allah Almighty tells me to fight with you and for this battle promises me good ... So, a war in which spears will break into pieces and swords will be smashed to smithereens."


Thus began the battle on the Turgai Plain (which V. Yang in his novel called the battle of the Irgiz River), and soon there was no trace of the self-confidence of Muhammad.

There are two versions of the course of this battle. According to the first, the right wings of the opposing armies simultaneously hit the left flanks of the enemy. The Mongols fled the left wing of the Khorezmians, and their center where Muhammad was already was crushed. Here is what Rashid ad-Din reports about this battle:
“On both sides, both right wings moved, and part of the Mongols attacked the center. There was a danger that the sultan would be captured. ”

Ata-Melik Juvaini in the work “Genghis Khan. The history of the conqueror of the world ”reports:
“Both sides launched an offensive, and the right flanks of both armies routed the opponents. The surviving part of the Mongol army was inspired by success; they struck in the center, where the sultan himself was; and he almost got captured. "

On the other, the Mongols struck the main blow in the center, completely collapsing it and almost captivating Khorezmshah himself.

Mongolian cavalry chasing the enemy. Thumbnail from the Collection of Annals of Rashid al-Din, XIV century

All authors agree that only the bold and decisive actions of Jalal ad-Din, who also achieved success in his field, did not allow the Mongols to defeat the Khorezm army. According to the first of these versions, his units dealt a slanting blow on the flank of the advancing Mongols, and on the second, a straight line in the direction of the center.

Rashid ad-Din:
“Celal ad-Din, having shown strong confrontation, repelled this attack, which the mountain could not hold back, and removed his father from this disastrous situation ... All that day until night, Sultan Dzhelal ad-Din fought stubbornly. After sunset, both troops, retreating to their places, indulged in rest. "

Ata-Melik Juvaini:
“Jalal ad-Din repelled the strikers and saved him (khoremshah).”

The outcome of the battle has not yet been decided, one of the Arab authors evaluated it this way:
"No one knew where the winner was, and where the vanquished, who the robber, and who the robbed."

At the night council, the Mongols decided that to continue the battle, losing people, does not make sense. The victory did not give them anything, since there was no question of a further attack on the possessions of Khorezmshah with such small forces. And they tested the fighting qualities of the Khorezm army, and, as subsequent events showed, they rated them not too highly. That same night, leaving burning fires in their camp, the Mongols went east.

But almost captured Muhammad II was very scared. Rashid ad-Din wrote:
“Fear and conviction in their (Mongols) courage took hold of the soul of the Sultan, he is said to say in his circle that he did not see anyone like these people with courage, stamina in the hardships of war, and the ability to pierce with a spear and beat with a sword by all rules.”

Spearman of the Mongolian cavalry

It is this fear that explains the actions of Muhammad during the next year’s military campaign.

Rashid ad-Din:
“Confusion and doubt found a way to him, and internal discord confused his external behavior. When he was personally convinced of the strength and power of the enemy and enlightened the reasons for the excitement of the unrest that had happened before, he was gradually overcome by confusion and longing, and in his speeches and actions signs of remorse began to appear ”.

Rashid ad-Din, Codex

So, Genghis Khan began to prepare for the invasion of Khorezm. According to modern estimates, Chinggis was able to send an army to 100 of thousands of people on this campaign, while the total number of troops of Muhammad II reached 300 of thousands. However, until recently, so brave, and now scared to death, Muhammad refused a new battle in the open field

He dispersed part of the soldiers over the garrisons of the fortresses, part - he led away behind the Amu Darya. His mother and wives went to the mountain fortress of Ilal in Iran. Having ordered to protect only big cities, Muhammad, in fact, gave Genghis Khan the best and richest part of the country. He hoped that having plundered enough, the Mongols with their prey would go to their steppes.

Muhammad did not know that the Mongols had already learned to take cities well. Moreover, “military experts” of the conquered countries actively helped them in this. The Zhurzhenets Zhang Rong commanded military engineers; the Khitan Sadarkhai (Xue Talahai) led stone-throwers and ferry builders.

Chinese and Saracen siege machines used by the Mongols

Siege machine of the Mongols

And the Chinese military taught the Mongols the method of the siege of the cities “hashar” (“crowd”), according to which during the assault, prisoners and civilians should be driven in front of themselves, as a human shield. The Mongols began to call a hashar not only a given military device, but also this forced contingent, whose members were also used as porters and laborers.

As a result of this fateful decision of the fearsome Muhammad, the Mongols got the opportunity to break the superior forces of the Khorezmians in parts, ruining Transoxiana (Maverannahr) with impunity, and gaining prisoners they needed so much for hashar. One can imagine what a heavy impression this made on the defenders of the fortresses, and how much it affected their morale and fighting spirit.

Muhammad al-Nasawi, “Biography of Sultan Jalal ad-Din Mankburn”:
“Having heard about the approach of Genghis Khan, (Muhammad) sent his troops to the cities of Maverannahr and the country of the Turks ... He did not leave a single city of Maverannahr without a large army, and this was a mistake. If he fought the Tatars with his troops before distributing them, he would have seized the Tatars in an armful and completely wiped them off the face of the earth. ”

Ata-Melik Juvaini claims that Jalal ad-Din was against such a war plan:
“He refused to obey his father’s plan ... and repeated:“ Scattering the army throughout the state and showing the tail to an adversary whom he has not yet met, moreover, who has not yet come out of his land, is the path of a miserable coward, not a powerful lord . If the Sultan does not dare to go to meet the enemy, and join the battle, and go on the offensive, and fight in close combat, but will persist in his decision to flee, let him entrust me with command of a valiant army, so that we can turn our faces to repel blows and to prevent the attacks of the windy Destiny, while there is still such an opportunity. ”

("Genghis Khan. History of the conqueror of the world.")

Timur-Melik, the commander of the Khorezmshah (who will soon become famous for the defense of Khojend), told him:
"To the one who does not know how to hold fast to the hilt of his sword, he, having turned his point, will chop off his head, lord."

Muhammad II remained adamant, and did not change his decision.

Rashid ad-Din testifies:
“Since he (Khorezmshah) was overcome by doubts, the gates of sound judgment closed for him, and sleep and peace fled from him ... Astrologers also said that ... until the ill-fated stars pass, one cannot proceed with caution directed against enemies. These words of astrologers were also an addition to the causes of the frustration of his business ...
He ordered the rebuilding of the fortress wall in Samarkand. Once he went over the moat and said: "If every soldier throws his whip out of the army that is against us, then the moat will fill up at once!"
Citizens and the army from these words of the Sultan became discouraged.
The sultan went on the road to Nahsheb, and everywhere he went, he said: "Get out yourself, because resistance to the Mongol army is impossible."

"Sultan Jalal ad-Din repeated:" The best way out is to gather, as it will be possible, the troops and oppose them (the Mongols). If (the Sultan) decides, (let him alone) fulfill the intention to go to Iraq, and I will give troops so that I go to the border and win and do what is feasible and possible. "
Sultan Muhammad, due to extreme (his) confusion and intimidation, did not (heed) him and considered ... the son’s opinion was child’s fun. ”

Ibn al-Asir:
“Khorezmshah ordered the inhabitants of Bukhara and Samarkand to prepare for the siege. He collected supplies for the defense and located twenty thousand horsemen in Bukhara for its defense, and fifty thousand in Samarkand, saying to them: “Protect the city until I return to Khorezm and Khorasan, where I will gather troops, and call on the help of Muslims and return to you".

Having done this, he went to Khorasan, crossed the Jaihun (Amu Darya) and became a camp near Balkh. As for the infidels, they prepared and moved to capture Maverannahr. "

The Mongol invasion of Khorezm will be described in the next article.

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site:

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Spartanez300
    Spartanez300 31 October 2019 06: 26
    Separated Khorezm did not shine in the confrontation with the army of the Mongols hardened in battles.
    1. Alexander Suvorov
      Alexander Suvorov 31 October 2019 08: 25
      Well, why, if Muhammad had the intelligence to transfer command to his son, then the Mongols would have at least not been sweet. In general, the fate of Muhammad is very revealing. This is what happens when a ruler is weak, stupid and cowardly.
      By the way, we must pay tribute to the Mongols, sabotage activity was at their best. The spread of false rumors, the sowing of distemper, etc., helped them more than once.
    2. dimann27
      dimann27 25 December 2019 19: 17
      You? Or, Spartan? Mongols seen?
  2. Free wind
    Free wind 31 October 2019 07: 08
    Interesting, informative. I wonder why this Muhammad did not unscrew the head? Everywhere there was fuss for the throne. and here the throne is not here; the country is at stake. But this is an alternative story.
    1. Alexander Trebuntsev
      Alexander Trebuntsev 31 October 2019 08: 09
      He did not trust anyone and made a bet on the Kipchak mercenaries, where his mother was from. Kipchakov hated Khorezm all and therefore they were guided by Mohamad. Take care of him.
  3. tlauicol
    tlauicol 31 October 2019 07: 56
    Kalashnikov's "Cruel Age" is a good book about this time, read it many times
  4. Alexander Trebuntsev
    Alexander Trebuntsev 31 October 2019 08: 06
    Regarding the killing of ambassadors, I would like to note that before the capture of the Chinese empire of Qin (or Jin), the Mongols not only killed the ambassadors, but also cooked them in boilers. It seems that they adopted the law on the integrity of ambassadors after the conquest of Qin. The Chinese ambassadors were inviolable. The episode of the very beginning of the 7th century is known when, before the war with the Korean empire, the Chinese ambassadors arrived at the Turks with the order to go to war. It turned out that at that time those had ambassadors from Korea with a proposal to attack the Chinese empire at the beginning of the war. The Türks realized that the Chinese would learn about the negotiations, they were frightened and issued ambassadors to the Chinese. There was a proposal to kill the ambassadors of Korea, but the Chinese ambassadors said that the ambassadors should not be killed and they were released.
    Regarding the number of armies of the Mongols and Khorezm, then there were different data. In particular, Sino-Mongolian sources report that Genghis Khan had 120 thousand. He could not take all the troops on a campaign - the Qin empire had not yet been conquered. Khorezm and Arab sources call the number of Mongols 200 thousand, but they also call the number of troops of Khorezm at 400 thousand.
  5. knn54
    knn54 31 October 2019 08: 10
    In a state where the main population is the Guz (Turkmens), the entire elite consisted of Kipchaks. It was uneasy and on the outskirts, especially in the lands of warlike (then) Karakalpaks. And Baghdad did not give rest.
    In the lands of the Mongols for 2 ... 3 years hunger reigned because of a poor harvest, which also "stimulated" the campaign of the Mongols and Co.
  6. novel66
    novel66 31 October 2019 08: 26
    a beautiful fairy tale ... "but the Mongols don't know" !!!
    1. Trilobite Master
      Trilobite Master 31 October 2019 17: 28
      Quote: novel xnumx
      a beautiful fairy tale ... "but the Mongols don't know" !!!

      Well, now you know how you differ from the Mongols ... You know. laughing
  7. Korsar4
    Korsar4 31 October 2019 08: 34
    Khorezmshah army hid the cities. And this is considered a mistake. When the Russian principalities tried to withstand the siege - this is perceived as the right action.

    The farther from our time - the more legendary. But how joyful are the legends to listen to.
    1. VLR
      31 October 2019 09: 01
      No, the situation is still different. The Russian principalities were divided, and the strength of each of them was less than the strength of the Mongols. Khorezm was, although loose, but a single state, and Khorezmshah was able to assemble an army that was significantly superior in numbers to the Mongol one. And he had at his disposal a commander who could fight on equal terms with any of the Mongol. Even 2. This will be discussed later.
      1. Korsar4
        Korsar4 31 October 2019 09: 16
        Of course. Any situation is unique. And Jalal ad-Din went down in history.

        But we are considering a game played. And you won’t take the move back.
      2. sivuch
        sivuch 31 October 2019 10: 37
        Well, the first one is probably Jalal himself (although here I have some doubts). And the second - Timur-Melik?
        1. VLR
          31 October 2019 10: 47
          Yes, it seems to me, a very good commander, if he had sufficient strength, he could have great pat on the Mongols
    2. Trilobite Master
      Trilobite Master 31 October 2019 17: 36
      Quote: Korsar4
      When the Russian principalities tried to withstand the siege - this is perceived as the right action.

      Not really, Sergey.
      Firstly, the Russians did not sit outside the walls. The Ryazan princes entered the field and gave battle to Batu, Yuri Suzdalsky also gave the Mongols a field battle near Kolomna, which they won with great difficulty. The defeat in the City, probably, cannot be considered a full-fledged battle, but it should also be noted that the troops gathered in the field camp, and not in the city. In the cities, the Russians sat out of necessity, in the hope of detaining Batu, gathering strength and continuing resistance. After the field defeats, there simply were no other options.
  8. gorenina91
    gorenina91 31 October 2019 08: 55
    -Yes, where did the Mongols get at least 100 thousand troops ... ???
    -Mongols and today in Mongolia "with modern medicine" -totally ...- 3 million 200 thousand inhabitants and this despite the fact that many have more than 10 children ...
    -And already 1000 years ago, with continuous universal chronic syphilis and other infectious diseases and epidemics ...- sheer degeneration ... -Mongols and it was ... nothing at all ... -What are there really "countless hordes" of Mongol conquerors , about which all and sundry are constantly writing ...
    -This is already in the days of the USSR, at the beginning of the 20th century, Soviet doctors with great difficulty began to rid the Mongols of various diseases; and then for the entire period of the 20th century, the Mongols could not multiply (although their birth rate was just cosmic) ... - But Mongolia itself did not participate in the nightmarish bloody wars (only on Khalkhin Gol a little bit in the union with the Red Army ..- and all) ...
    -Read about conquests and campaigns ...- all this of course is entertaining ...; but every real and sober-minded person can imagine ...- how all this could be ...
    1. VLR
      31 October 2019 09: 18
      The Mongols were just the core of the invading army. The bulk of their troops were soldiers of conquered peoples. With Batu Khan, only 4 000 Mongols came to Russia, almost all of them are known by name, since they became the founders of noble families. the rest is a national steppe hodgepodge. Similarly, the Macedonians were a very insignificant part of the army of Alexander the Great. And Macedonia now, too, is by no means a great country. For the same reason as Mongolia: these countries spent their strength, many men, the best of the best, left them and did not return: either they died or settled in foreign countries.
    2. 3x3zsave
      3x3zsave 31 October 2019 10: 53
      Until 1492 there was no syphilis in the Old World.
      1. Catfish
        Catfish 31 October 2019 15: 41
        "And a fashionable disease, it was recently presented to you" (C).
        God was merciful, as well as from everything else, besides cursing drunkenness. drinks
        1. gorenina91
          gorenina91 31 October 2019 17: 39
          - Most likely A. Pushkin meant the plague ... - In "Little Tragedies" there is exactly "Feast during the Plague" ...
          1. 3x3zsave
            3x3zsave 31 October 2019 18: 10
            Taki Pushkin most likely had in mind the RFPs, which were very widespread in the Republic of Ingushetia, after 1812. And we had known the plague in our area for a very long time. Although, the plague pandemic of the 14th century almost bypassed Russia. Inexplicable fact, some small-town fluctuations.
          2. Catfish
            Catfish 31 October 2019 18: 37
            I doubt the plague has ever been called fashionable. All "fashions" came from France, Spain and Britain, so they brought to Europe what they were awarded by the loving Indian ladies. wink
        2. 3x3zsave
          3x3zsave 31 October 2019 18: 00
          Why did God have mercy from herpes?
          1. Catfish
            Catfish 31 October 2019 18: 34
            And what about you, maestro, to ask me? laughing
            1. 3x3zsave
              3x3zsave 31 October 2019 18: 51
              You can, sir, ask about the "beloved woman." The answer will be as anecdotal as the question. laughing
              1. Catfish
                Catfish 31 October 2019 19: 32
                Thank you, the "beloved woman" is sacred, and the one who has her is happy. smile
        3. bubalik
          bubalik 31 October 2019 18: 08
          Today, 11: 53
          Today, 16: 41
          ,,, since such a booze has gone, I’ll bring in my five cents yes
          Thanks to the author, especially for the information about the statue. good somehow passed by, recourse impressive belay
          ,, well, the Mongolian, also impressed laughing

          fast as the wind lol
          1. 3x3zsave
            3x3zsave 31 October 2019 18: 35
            Today, Helovin, may the moderators become humble and will not delete the page from the dictionary.
            1. bubalik
              bubalik 31 October 2019 18: 39
              ,,, this is a dictionary bully why delete? request
              1. 3x3zsave
                3x3zsave 31 October 2019 18: 54
                - But Rabinovich, for what?!?!?
                - And for the company!
          2. Hantengri
            Hantengri 31 October 2019 19: 51
            .... - scabbard, case;

            Inspired by:
            C. Castaneda:
            - Don Juan, and if I do exercises for the uterus, will I stand?
            Don Juan:
            - Will be. But inward.
    3. voyaka uh
      voyaka uh 31 October 2019 16: 27
      "Yes, where the Mongols could recruit at least 100 thousand troops ... ???" /////
      In different historical epochs, one and the same people quantitatively changed many times, one way, then the other.
      There was no consistent growth, as it is now.
      The population of China, for example, then grew ten times, then declined.
      The Mongols knew how to count perfectly.
      Their army was strictly divided into units. And their numbers are real. Like the numbers of the Roman legions.
      Overestimated many times by those who gathered their armies once, for some "great battle." And then the rest were dismissed to their homes.
      1. gorenina91
        gorenina91 31 October 2019 17: 32
        The Mongols knew how to count perfectly.

        -Any people love fairy tales, traditions, myths, etc. ...
        -From where did the Mongols know something and could .. ??? -Practical development as in the Stone Age ... -cave worldview; nor the normal level of blacksmithing; neither the ability to forge and make weapons of normal quality ... -Pitiless cattle-breeding related communities scattered throughout the steppe ...
        - Yes, and where did the primitive steppe cattle breeders come from ...
        - All their "organizations" were enough ... - it was enough to get lost in a gang, several dozen in number ... and attack a little guarded caravan ...
        -There is a real fact ...- this is the "Great Wall of China" ...- She could not save from a regular equipped army, but from such gangs ... she could easily protect ... -The riders on the wall could easily give a signal about the attack of the savages ... -And while they climbed ... they could fight them themselves ...
        -Yes, and this wall itself played a more symbolic role ... -just so civilized Chinese virtually fenced themselves off from the world of savages ...- they simply contemptuously distanced themselves from them ...
        -The Chinese didn’t even eat milk and dairy products then, so as not to become like the savage Mongols (and among the Mongols, dairy products were widely used as food) ...
        -That, besides this Chinese wall (its existence cannot be denied in any way) ...- everything else, for the most part ... is myths and fiction ...
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 31 October 2019 17: 42
          Both the Genghisides empire and the Chinese empires are well documented by descriptions of Arab and European merchants.
          They described the same cities and peoples in different languages. And these letters quite converge. The Mongols at that time came up with the best military organization. And she allowed them to capture states that far surpassed them in economic development. And enter them into your empire.
          The Mongol commander did not need to know how the catapult works, or how to build a wall-beat machine. He had to take some Chinese specialists on a campaign and get helpers for them: strong and skilled joiners / carpenters and improvised materials - logs.
          1. gorenina91
            gorenina91 31 October 2019 17: 52
            -Likewise, you can declare the Mongols and the great sailors and representatives of an ancient civilization with a rich culture ...
            - So ... - all this was written about them by different peoples "in different languages", and what the Mongols themselves "wrote" - yes, and could they "write" ... - and still did not know how to build, sculpt, create great works of art ... - they had no architecture., no architecture, no literature ... -all that we know about them ... is what someone stated about them (and there are a lot of them) and put it on display ...
            -Even the mythical Ch-khan the Mongols were able to erect an imposing idol only in the 21st century ...- before that somehow they were not honored ...- "there was not enough talent" ...
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 31 October 2019 17: 56
              The empires of antiquity often consisted of one "military nation", which managed to subdue and unite dozens of other peoples and states. Some of them far outnumbered the "military nation" in art or economics.
              Whether we like it or not, this is the story of mankind.
              Genghis Khan was a very, very specific person. His genes (and he had hundreds of children from wives and slaves) are traced in a significant part of the population of eastern countries.
              1. gorenina91
                gorenina91 31 October 2019 18: 12
                -A good organization can be only with a high civilization ..- others. Greeks; Rome; crusades from enlightened Europe (where there were already free student cities); and Hannibal came to conquer Rome from a very rich civilized "Hannibalia" (and Carthage had such a technical and financial potential), etc. ... -And all this happened as early as 1500 years before the Mongols ...
                -And what can a gang of primitive pastoralists who lacked military skills and discipline ..; no normal weapons ...
                - Once the Huns could destroy something and rob someone ... - that's how it all ended ... - then they did not know what to do ... - dead end ... - so they disappeared .. .-And also ...- it was long "before the Mongols" ...
                -And since then the time has been different ... -what miserable herders there ...- whom they could conquer ...
                - Most likely, the Chinese themselves then hired these steppe bandits for their internal squabbles ... -from here and "ears grow" ...
                1. voyaka uh
                  voyaka uh 31 October 2019 18: 18
                  This is not so ... they were not poor pastoralists, and not the Chinese hired them, but they - the Chinese.
                  I repeat: there are dozens of descriptions of the khans, their tents, stuffed with gold (from raids and taxes from merchants). Their customs. And Chinese descriptions, including. Where the Chinese do not call themselves masters, but vice versa.
                  It's a pity to disappoint you ... hi
                  1. gorenina91
                    gorenina91 31 October 2019 18: 34
                    -Chinese "descriptions" ... are also not "the truth of the first instance" ... -They have piled up a lot about their allegedly "5000-year history" in order to present themselves "higher" ... -Now, when historians have started " understand ", then a lot does not correspond to their fictions ...
                    - Yes, figs with them, with the Chinese ... - let them swim in their "River backwaters" ... - it's not about them ...
                    - It’s just that the Chinese will always put it this way ...- how beneficial it is ... -And about the Mongols ...
                    It's a pity to disappoint you ...

                    - I can say one thing ... - personally, I do not belong to the "sympathizers" ... - nor the Mongols; not even the Chinese ... -So ... there can be no disappointment ...
                    1. voyaka uh
                      voyaka uh 31 October 2019 18: 40
                      "Now that historians have begun to" understand ", a lot does not correspond to their inventions" ///
                      Now, on the contrary, European archaeologists are allowed to excavate in China. And it turns out that the Chinese had not exaggerated before, but rather strongly rejuvenated (out of ignorance) their history. Their civilization comes straight from the Bronze Age. Even the Chinese learned to breed carps in ponds when they used stone knives. laughing
                      1. gorenina91
                        gorenina91 31 October 2019 18: 54
                        - Well, here it is ... - here it is and ... - this "moment of truth" ... - the Chinese caught wild shepherds who had strayed from their kind in the steppes and used them to dig these ponds; yes, even for the construction of the "Great Wall of China" most likely they used ...
                        -Here ...- this was then a real "suitable place" for these savages ... -Probably the Mongols themselves came to hire the Chinese ...- the poor steppe could not always feed ...
                        And today Mongolia clearly does not shine ... - absolutely nothing .., and even then ... - It's just "laughing chickens" ... - Hahah ...
                        -And then ...- "great conquerors"; "brave warriors"; "iron militaristic machine" .... -Well, and ...- will come up with the same ... -Just ... -Hahah ...
                      2. ORINCH
                        ORINCH 5 November 2019 09: 29
                        In 1644, a people called the Manchus, which was, in fact, a conglomerate of the Tungus tribes (their closest relatives were the Nanai and Udege, the slightly more distant Evenki) attacked China. After 40 years of war in 1683, the Manchus established full control over the territory of stagnated China, including the island of Taiwan. By 1689, they won the Amur region, which, due to depopulation (the entire population was mobilized to conquer China), the Russians tried to capture. They established a regime of brutal military dictatorship in China, requiring the Chinese to shave their heads and wear braids as a sign of submission to the Manchu dynasty. This regime fell only in 1911. So, in the Manchu army, half of the troops were Mongols, and the regime in the Qing Empire was a Manchu-Mongolian ethnocracy. For almost 270 years, the Manchus and the Mongols constituted a privileged military administrative class, creating the China that we know. All the Manchus and Mongols at the time of the fall of their empire, there were 3-4 million in 400 millionth China.
                        These are such great conquerors, brave warriors and an iron militaristic machine.
                      3. ORINCH
                        ORINCH 5 November 2019 09: 44
                        This seems surprising if you do not know the history of the Manchu and the Tungus peoples as a whole. And for a knowledgeable person there is nothing surprising in the Manchu rise. Because the Manchus are the descendants of the Jurchens, the creators of the north-Chinese state of Jin (Golden) in the 12-13 centuries, the most ardent opponent of the Mongols. Their ruling clan, Aishin Gero (Golden Rod), considered himself a descendant of the reigning Jin dynasty. And before the Jin state, the ancestors of the Jurchens created the kingdom of Bohai and other politicians of the Far East. There is an ancient line of continuity in both state building and disintegration, both in elevation and in fall.
                        In the same way, the Mongols are a link in the line of continuity from Donghu and Syanbi to the Qing Empire. Their history must be considered in the context of this continuity, then stupid questions and assessments do not arise.
          2. Doliva63
            Doliva63 31 October 2019 18: 04
            Quote: voyaka uh
            Both the Genghisides empire and the Chinese empires are well documented by descriptions of Arab and European merchants.
            They described the same cities and peoples in different languages. And these letters quite converge. The Mongols at that time came up with the best military organization. And she allowed them to capture states that far surpassed them in economic development. And enter them into your empire.
            The Mongol commander did not need to know how the catapult works, or how to build a wall-beat machine. He had to take some Chinese specialists on a campaign and get helpers for them: strong and skilled joiners / carpenters and improvised materials - logs.

            That is, the Mongols of Genghis Khan - the empire of managers? laughing
            1. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 31 October 2019 18: 12
              Effective managers! laughing
              Cruel: a little something - with a whip or chop heads ...
              But fair: if a good child, you always get a chowder in a bowl.
              Such were tough times! am
              (and not only in antiquity).
              And they loved merchants and did not touch. Paid tax and travel from Spain or Italy to China is provided without security. In Europe - silk and pasta. fellow
    4. tanit
      tanit 31 October 2019 17: 05
      Yeah, and there could be no cities. If "to think real and soberly". Even now there can be no cities.
    5. Trilobite Master
      Trilobite Master 31 October 2019 17: 52
      Quote: gorenina91
      a sober-minded person can imagine

      A sober person will not even try to think on a topic about which he has the most vague idea, because he knows that any proposition follows from the premises and that these premises must be true in order to be true.
      Professional historians are people, I assure you, not at all stupid and, contrary to the opinion of some odious freaks from history, for the most part not politically engaged, they study the Mongol empire, its campaigns and conquests, without questioning its existence, because they do not find it sufficient grounds.
      The pseudo-historical nonsense about the impossibility of Genghis Khan's campaigns is broadcasted mainly by those who consider themselves "sober", but have absolutely no knowledge of the sources, or general ideas about the era, or even the rudiments of methods of historical scientific knowledge.
      Tell me, where did you get information about
      Quote: gorenina91
      continuous chronic syphilis
      among the mongols? Is this your personal conclusion or read somewhere?
      1. gorenina91
        gorenina91 31 October 2019 18: 17
        - Magpie on the tail brought ...
        -You yourself take and read about Mongolia of the period ..., at least ...- "late 19th-early 20th centuries" ...
        -What was there and what was happening there ...
        1. Trilobite Master
          Trilobite Master 31 October 2019 18: 37
          I have read enough about Mongolia of the 13th century. The conversation is about the XIII century. Why should I read about the 19th-20th centuries?
          Do you really think that such a crude extrapolation to 800 years ago is appropriate and correct?
          I think you should first study a little of that particular era, you will be surprised, but in the XIII century. people have not even heard about many of the problems of our contemporaries.
          And forty with tails is better not to listen. smile
      2. Elturisto
        Elturisto 31 October 2019 18: 37
        I correctly understand that only holders of diplomas who have acquired gemmoroy in the archive can think soberly ... All the scum like Novokhrozhites, Anastasievites and other shit just appeared thanks to Toynbee, Gumtlev, Nefedov, Kleins and, for example, Vashchenok ... After all, who such a modern historian-interpreter of written sources ... there are no knowledgeable knowledge in his head .... but there is a wild conceit mixed with foolishness.
        1. Trilobite Master
          Trilobite Master 31 October 2019 18: 52
          Quote: ElTuristo
          I understand correctly that only holders of diplomas can think soberly

          The one to whom it is given by nature, regardless of education, can think soberly.
          For some it is from nature, from birth it is not given. Especially for such people, I can repeat: a sober person will not even think about the problem, and even more so, draw conclusions and pass them off as truth, without making sure that the premises from which he can proceed in his reasoning are correct and there are enough . So understandable?
          Or it’s quite primitive: if you don’t understand a damn thing in any area of ​​human activity, no super-sober discussion on this topic will bring any benefit, it’s best to just close your mouth to listen to experts.
          1. Hantengri
            Hantengri 31 October 2019 21: 00
            Quote: Trilobite Master
            Or it’s quite primitive: if you don’t understand a damn thing in any area of ​​human activity, no super-sober discussion on this topic will bring any benefit, it’s best to just close your mouth to listen to experts.

            Bravo, Michael! drinks Once again, I envy your patience.
          2. Elturisto
            Elturisto 31 October 2019 23: 53
            “The one to whom it is given by nature, regardless of education, can think soberly.
            For some, this is not given by nature, from birth. Especially for such people, I can repeat: a sober-minded person will not even think about the problem, and even more so, draw conclusions and pass them off as truth, ... "Oh yes .... I did not expect anything else ... What would I judge a tormented person in front of you or not, according to your own logic ... you have to be a psychotherapist, you are not, so you better follow your advice, "it's best to just shut your mouth to listen to specialists ..."
            1. Trilobite Master
              Trilobite Master 1 November 2019 10: 45
              Quote: ElTuristo
              According to your own logic, to judge a tormented person in front of you or not ... you need to be a psychotherapist

              This is solely by your logic, which is probably different from the generally accepted one.
              Any person, regardless of his professional background, can detect errors in the reasoning of another, if he masters the methods of logical thinking (capable of "sober thinking") better.
              But to evaluate parcels, their truthfulness and sufficiency for the production of certain conclusions, can only be a specialist in a certain field and his assessment will be all the more true than a specialist more qualified.
              However, why am I explaining this to you? You seem to have a purely own process of thinking that ignores the generally accepted rules of logic, otherwise where would a "psychotherapist" come from in your head? By the way, ask who it is and what it does.
              1. Elturisto
                Elturisto 4 November 2019 21: 09
                From the whole post, I liked the turnover-qualification ... :) Very funny ... So you inflate yourself and your worthless Padawans with qualifications, - "the cuckoo praises the rooster, for the fact that he praises the cuckoo ..." - you seem to be a person . quite not stupid ... however, you were asked a completely intelligible question ... and you slipped into trolling ... not good ... by the way, on the occasion of your Padawan, in all seriousness, he quotes which Arab, claiming that there was a living in Samarkand in the 13th century 400 thousand souls is how? In my opinion, the psychotherapist will no longer help no?
                1. Trilobite Master
                  Trilobite Master 4 November 2019 22: 36
                  Quote: ElTuristo
                  you were asked a completely intelligible question ... and you rolled down to trolling

                  I did not notice the question, all the more intelligible.
                  In addition, I do not consider myself obligated to answer every question that I am asked here.
                  I understand that you defend the point of view according to which any person can speak out about any issue and his opinion should be taken into account on an equal basis with the others, even if he is a complete amateur, and the others have been studying the question for years, did I understand you correctly? If so, then it is necessary to solve the question of the truth of this or that knowledge by direct popular vote, probably. smile This approach is usually enjoyed by all rogues from science.
                  I do not know who you mean by the word "padawan", but I myself have never stated anything like this, simply because I have not studied this issue. Maybe 400 thousand people lived in Samarkand, depending on how to count, whom to count ... Or maybe not. Chroniclers often exaggerated. On this occasion, competent works may have already been written, which take into account the area of ​​the settlement, the density of building, the average number of one family, etc., as Tolochko did with respect to the ancient Russian cities. I have not read these works, therefore I do not make categorical statements on this issue and do not advise you.
                  And yet, what is this "intelligible question" to which I have not answered? I'm curious.
    6. Alexander Trebuntsev
      Alexander Trebuntsev 1 November 2019 08: 11
      Talk nonsense. The Mongols were subordinate to the Qin empire and she conducted a census of subjects. By the time of the accession of Genghis Khan, there were more than 2.5 million Mongols. And the population of Russia, by the way, was much smaller, although here today too different numbers are called. Someone says that 1.2-1.5 million, some more, but the essence does not change. There were more Mongols, this is a fact and the second - they went en masse in the invasion, while sedentary peoples were scattered over a vast territory and not so mobile at all.
  9. evgic
    evgic 31 October 2019 09: 03
    According to modern estimates, Chinggis was able to send an army of 100 thousand people on this campaign, while the total number of troops of Muhammad II reached 300 thousand.
    If you divide by 10, it seems to get a figure close to the truth. With an army of 300 thousand households, he would have gone all over Mongolia and China, and then Europe and Asia. 100 thousand Mongols no less fantastic digital. Let me remind you that Napoleon, not mentioned by night, Bonopart, was able to gather 570 thousand people from all over Europe. And this is sorry 1812, the 19th century. The population has grown significantly, the economy is tens of times, medicine and prevention were already present in the army. 100 thousand Mongols simply would not have reached Khorezm and had rest from military diarrhea and lost most of their horses.
    1. gorenina91
      gorenina91 31 October 2019 11: 16
      Yes, that’s the point ...
      - Already in the enlightened 19th century during the Crimean War of 1853-1856 ...- all that war ended with a monstrous epidemic of dysentery and other intestinal diseases ... -And from which there more soldiers died ...- from bullets and shells .. .or from diseases ...- this is another question ...
      1. VLR
        31 October 2019 11: 26
        Not a question - right up to the era of antiseptics and antibiotics, more people died from diseases in all wars. And none of the parties in this regard had an advantage. And the advancing army suffered losses from disease, and retreating. Both besiegers and besieged.
      2. tanit
        tanit 31 October 2019 17: 14
        Yes, and cities, cities can not be. Their existence is not possible. Even now.
      3. Sul Carnine
        Sul Carnine 1 November 2019 16: 52
        Good day!
        Ma'am, please, stop commenting on yourself in the comments! If you want to look original, think up, for example, a beautiful signature.
      4. ORINCH
        ORINCH 5 November 2019 09: 55
        Among the everyday habits of the Mongols, there is still a rule not to drink raw water and milk. Milk is consumed only in fermented form in the form of fermented milk products, of which there are dozens. Instead of raw water they drink tea. Of course, people who graze cattle all year round and live in yurts are naturally resistant to respiratory diseases from hypothermia. Thus, the lifestyle itself minimizes the two main causes of mortality in the troops before the modern era - gastrointestinal tract and respiratory system diseases.
  10. Trilobite Master
    Trilobite Master 31 October 2019 10: 09
    Good material and, most importantly, the right one.
    Thanks to the author. Today will not be boring.
    1. kalibr
      kalibr 31 October 2019 16: 51
      I also like the materials of Valery. Just interesting to read. It is a real gift to be able to write like that.
  11. Ptolemy Lag
    Ptolemy Lag 31 October 2019 10: 51
    We look forward to continuing!
  12. faterdom
    faterdom 31 October 2019 11: 42
    Something in this article with markup. I have it formatted for a smartphone with a narrow column. Comments are in normal width. Only this article, the rest behave normally.
    1. VLR
      31 October 2019 11: 59
      You know, I have the same thing - try zooming out to 150, then you can read normally
    2. VLR
      31 October 2019 12: 47
      Seems to have fixed
  13. Gorbunov Artem
    Gorbunov Artem 31 October 2019 13: 27
    Interesting article. I do not comment on the authors. But now I would like to ask to describe the campaign of the Mongols in China. Lead at that time China was a rapidly fluttering country (gunpowder, ships, fortification). It seems)
    1. ORINCH
      ORINCH 5 November 2019 10: 00
      China was then divided between several warring states, and the Mongols crushed each of them.
  14. Operator
    Operator 31 October 2019 13: 54
    The state of Khorezmshahs lasted less than 100 years and was a loose hodgepodge of Central Asians, Persians, Seljuks and descendants of the Huns.

    Before the Mongol invasion, the indigenous Central Asians more than once underwent cultural, religious and biological assimilation by migrants - Aryans, Macedonians, Persians, Huns, Central Asian Celts and Arabs. Religions alone happened five times - paganism, the Greek pantheon of gods, fire worship, Christianity, Judaism, Islam. As a result, the Central Asians lost their ethnic identity (Northern Semites) and were ready to lie under any conqueror.
  15. faterdom
    faterdom 31 October 2019 16: 16
    Quote: VlR
    Seems to have fixed

    Thanks, fixed. An interesting and little-known moment in history. Genghis demolished the Khorezm cities with incredible cruelty, sometimes destroying all the inhabitants.
    It turns out that the governor of Khorezm did his best to earn such an attitude.
    Unlucky residents much.
  16. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 31 October 2019 16: 17
    Excellent article! good
    I have already forgotten Yana, but here it is stated in detail and clearly.
  17. tanit
    tanit 31 October 2019 17: 12
    Correct if I am mistaken. The garrison of Samarkand is 40, Bukhara surrendered without a fight, but in Otrar just 000 soldiers stood. However, these cities were destroyed with the garrisons and with the inhabitants?
  18. Elturisto
    Elturisto 31 October 2019 18: 41
    The article is weak. There is nothing new. However, as well as a real historical analysis. The clot of idealism is supposedly if only if they had appointed Jell-ed-din or someone else, and then hoo ...
  19. Karen
    Karen 31 October 2019 19: 24
    Well, then Jalal ad-Din with his army escaped from the khan and captured Armenia and Georgia ... He apparently wanted to repeat the route laid half a century before by other Turks ... But these Turks (Konii) opposed, and having called the Armenian state of Cilicia and the Kurdish state on the shore of Lake Van Khlat as allies, they went to war against Jalal ... I don’t remember what the battle ended with ...
  20. bandabas
    bandabas 31 October 2019 19: 45
    . A bunch of sources. The author is a solid minus.
  21. VLR
    1 November 2019 08: 09
    I would like to say a few words about Mongolia - the era of Genghis Khan and modern. Present-day Mongolia is in a completely different phase of its ethnogenesis. And looking at her, it is really difficult to believe that it could be otherwise. In the same way, it is difficult to believe, looking at the horizon, that the Earth is round, any "sober" person will come to the logical conclusion that it is flat. But in Mongolia, where the coals are now smoldering, there was once a bonfire. Another example is Hungary: it is hard to believe that the Magyars were once the nightmare of Europe. But you have to. But the Mongols and Hungarians still survived as nations and preserved national states. And where is the state of the Huns or Avars? Where is the mighty Assyria? Huns, Avars, Assyrians and their conquests were not there either?
    1. tanit
      tanit 1 November 2019 15: 30
      First victories over the Mongols. Khorezm. Tell us. They were. About "Stand to Death".
    2. ORINCH
      ORINCH 5 November 2019 10: 07
      For a person who does not know history well, yes, the Mongol conquests seem to be an amazing phenomenon. But if a person knows at least a little about the Manchu Qing dynasty that ruled over China, and the Dzungaria, for him there will be no more mysteries. And the Mongols will become part of the great historical process.
  22. dimann27
    dimann27 25 December 2019 19: 09
    Did anyone, in the head, have a thought? Like, you: "Genghis, a tall blond, with heavenly eyes."
  23. dimann27
    dimann27 25 December 2019 19: 22
    Genghis was right! Wet, liberals! And then, they’ll do business, you won’t rake it!
  24. Farkhod mamadiev
    Farkhod mamadiev April 16 2020 22: 09
    A big question for the author, you can describe in detail all the major clashes between the Mongols and the Khorezmians, where all these 300 thousand soldiers went, in which battles they were most lost, thank you in advance for your attention)
  25. Molot1979
    Molot1979 15 January 2023 12: 29
    I will express my own opinion. It would be clear that the main reason for such a rapid collapse of Khorezm was the behavior of Khorezmshah Muhammad. But why? Battle on the Irgiz? But, excuse me, Mohammed II was not a harem college student, he spent a lot of wars and saw everything. And to be so crippled by the fighting qualities of the Mongols? Moreover, despite the fact that on points the victory did go to his army? Doubtful. Any other in his place, on the contrary, would be filled with self-confidence, even respecting the warriors of Genghis as strong and skillful opponents. And here it’s a psychological breakdown in all respects. From what? I think that the reason for this is just the two-faced, if not outright treacherous behavior of the Khorezmshah in the story of the Otrar caravan. After all, he turned out to be wrong there. First he destroyed and plundered the caravan, then he killed the ambassador. And before that, Allah swore to Genghis Khan in friendship and good intentions. But, apparently, Alla-ed-Din Muhammad II was a sincere believer. And this realization of his own perjury, and even in His name, shocked Muhammad. He apparently decided that Allah is punishing him for perjury right here and now, and who can stand against the will of the Almighty? That is why he considered the war lost in advance, and his country and himself personally - doomed. And the fact that he almost fell into the hands of those whom he himself provoked to war is just a thick hint from Allah about his future fate.