undoubtedly most people associate the
Mongol conquest of the horizion Empire
with vicious massacre the destruction of
cities and towers of skulls one might
assume the Mongols try to exterminate
everything past the sir Darya River many
contemporary writers saw the Mongols as
the end of days Chingiz Han is God's
punishment but as with so much of
history the truth is more complex
the Mongols goal was not extermination
and they took multiple approaches to the
submission of cities I am going to try
to explain why the Mongols undertook
these massacres I am NOT going to
justify them and this discussion will be
limited to the invasion of ISM to
explain these measures we go back to
chingus Hans early days in 12th century
Mongolia before Mongol unification
steppe warfare was cyclical after a
battle the losing side fled while the
victors raided the enemy camp all those
who fled regrouped and struck back later
continuing the cycle the failure of the
victors to finish off the vanquished
allowed Temujin to escape several close
calls teaching him that if the enemy
leadership escaped they'd only continue
to resist one of Tunisians reforms to
Mongol warfare was to prevent looting
until after the battle stopping the
enemy from escaping and ensuring total
victory in 1202 this strategy was
brought to full effect against the
Tatars hereditary enemies of Tim
Burton's family when the Tatars were
defeated
they were rounded up and executed the
survivors dispersed among the Mongols of
slaves his ability to totally defeat his
enemies and consolidate his power
allowed immersion to unify the Mongols
by 1200 and six in the early campaigns
against the Tongass and Jin dynasty in
China the Mongols learned how to
besieged cities while marked by
slaughter of civilian populations much
of Mongol energies in these years were
directed against unfortified locations
major centers like the Jin Capital Chun
to falling only after prologue
sieges when Chengdu fell in 1215 its
population had suffered months of
starvation and disease and the Mongols
took out their pent-up anger with
slaughter the early Mongol Jin Wars saw
many pitched field battles and
Garrison's rushing out to meet them in
comparison though her Azzam campaign was
marked almost exclusively by sieges the
horror genre Strada than organize a
defense believing the city walls
sufficient defense to leave each city to
its fate but by 1219 the Mongols had the
technology and knowledge take cities and
a civilian population thus took the
direct force of the Mongol attack laying
the groundwork for slaughter we've
explained before the reasons for the
Mongol invasion of hores 'm essentially
revenge for the murder of Mongol envoy's
diplomatic insults between two growing
empires silently becoming neighbors this
idea of revenge was an important part of
the Mongol strategy punishing hores
omission haunted hence the reason for
death and Suba days famous pursuit of
him the intention was not a total
conquest of the horizion Empire or the
West and when the Mongol armies withdrew
only transics amia was incorporated
fully into the empire Corazon left a
ruinous buffer what infused Mongol
actions was at horison transgressed
against chingus Han and it was his duty
to correct it while often depicted as
exterminating every city they came
across historian Peter Jackson has
identified the variety of approaches the
Mongols had for dealing with cities
dependent mostly on their level of
resistance the best the city could hope
for was that the Mongols were in a hurry
such as during the pursuit to shot
Muhammad for reasons of haste if a city
surrendered provisions a tribute were
taken perhaps a governor appointed and
then the Mongols passed on if a city
refused to submit but defenses were too
strong to speedily take it then the site
was marked to be punished at a later
date more regularly a city was submitted
immediately would have its population
spared but some carry to offer forced
levy in addition to tribute and taking a
nap
to governor and could the man the city
dismantled its fortifications failure to
comply resulted in reprisal if the
city's garrison resisted but the
civilian population submitted the
military forces in leadership were
killed and the above-mentioned demands
applied there was a chance of the
population being forced out while the
mongols plundered the city the
punishment for a siege was severe
generally adult males were killed the
women and children taken into slavery
the city of wandered and artisans and
craftsmen transported back east for
Mongol service the most extreme
punishment was for the killing of an
imperial Prince a prominent commander or
for a strong defense which resulted in
many Mongol losses now the town and
population were utterly destroyed
supposedly not even cats rats or dogs
spared in the ensuing slaughter while
craftsmen and artisans were kept from
honorable service it is in these cases
that we see the stories of towers of
skulls and towns left in complete ruin
states they remained in for decades
while there are exceptions to the above
the Mongols were quite consistent in
this matter this was punishment for
resistance and the level of resistance
brought the level of reprisal if a town
resisted or rose up after submitting
like mayor of or nishapur then the
Mongols had to ensure it could not rise
up again this process served the Mongols
in other ways forcing the young men into
the levee or killing them grinded down
the segment of the population most
likely to revolt that later date those
brought into the levee acted as meat
shields soaking up enemy arrows and
filling in moats and sieges a thankless
task with high mortality which protected
Mongol eyes and helped gain victory
elsewhere the destruction of cities and
populations built fear of the Mongols
showing that resistance brought death
while sparing those who submitted was a
warning to other settlements to submit
rather than face certain doom while the
Mongols were adapted seizures they
wished to avoid them if passed
and encouraged stories of their ferocity
as we saw in our video on the siege of
Jergens the mongols were not unaware of
the economic value of cities juichi wish
to spare Jergens for it was a large
prosperous city on wealthy trade routes
plundering a city brought a one-time
benefit but taxing it every year was
annual income we can summarize the
reasons for massacre as essentially
punishment for resisting Mongol
Authority warning other cities what the
price for resistance was the destruction
of cities was an outgrowth of Tring
Hassan's belief in total victory by
total defeat the fee enemy valuing
longer lives over the potential trouble
caused by an urban population in regards
to numbers our Islamic sources speak of
losses in the millions especially for
the major centers of her as on at Merve
the Persian rider Giovanni says they
killed 1.3 million or that elsewhere the
Mongols will kill a million and then
return and still find survivors to kill
while cities were overpopulated by
refugees fleeing the Mongols we
struggled to find cities outside of
China in the 13th century with such huge
populations archaeological study at O
char site of the infamous massacre which
precipitated the invasion estimates the
population closer to 16,000 we lack the
census data necessary to make inaccurate
estimates of the lost and we should take
these extreme numbers carefully many of
these cities like Bukhara and Samarkand
actually recovered quicker than popular
narrative suggests even Allah fear
writing into 12 20s heard that transics
Aniyah was recovering well and by the
1250 s Juve nee believed it had returned
to its former prosperity the Muslim
writers were trying to make sense of
unimaginable losses on an inconceivable
scale the authors might as well say
millions as there was no way to
calculate the true losses
it is perhaps no surprise they
considered it an apocalyptic event the
Mongols heavens wrath for how else could
you explain such
Amity or even a stoutest of walls seemed
useless against them oversize numbers
may also come from the mongols
themselves building up their dread image
by grossly inflating those killed while
minimizing their own losses we see this
in a letter to king Louis the ninth in
1262 Hulagu Han bragging of two million
killed at Baghdad far greater than that
declining cities actual population when
jus veiny or even Allah Thea wrote of
millions killed it may have been because
the Mongol propaganda machine had
supplied them with such figures while
millions may not have died at individual
cities the total losses were certainly
over a million if not directly from
Mongol arrows and from the resulting
starvation disease or conflict from
warlords fighting for power when the
Mongols withdrew much of transics ante
and horizont relied on extensive
irrigation canals for agriculture those
who could operate them were killed or
fled and they fell into disrepair the
orchards and gardens which once
surrounded these cities dried up
contributing further to the hardship
suffered i hope this provides some
clarification on the Mongol invasions
not mindless destruction for
destructions sake but goal-oriented
conquest with levels for handling cities
while cities were devastated and
abandoned it was not intended to totally
depopulate the region but assist in the
spread of Mongol rule there's still much
to discuss on this topic this video only
scratching the surface and serving as
introduction and time I will follow this
with a discussion on whether these
massacres and tactics could be defined
as genocide