Mongols versus Western Europe post-1241

 

I thought the thread died when last I posted but it seems I missed alot.

 

First, about your theory sarmat that mongols had no intention of ever expanding to egypt, then why the messengers in the first place? All historians of the period agree that kitubga send messengers demanding surrender of the Mamlukes and under the full support of Hulegu himself. Those messengers were hanged on the gate of Zuwailah and an army was massed to attack them. Kitubga attacked Mamluk lands in Palestine before even a formal declaration of war.

 

Second, mongols never withdrew from Syria, they were defeated and kicked out. They had at least three tumens and we know the names of at least two guys who had the rank noyan one was Kitubga and another I forgot his name with a third unidentified man. Of course not to mention the 6 thousand Georgians and 10 thousand Armenians who were with the mongols in Syria and the Ayubid princes of Aleppo and Hims (if I am not mistaken) who joined the mongols with their armies and fought to death. It took Hulegu with at least 100k men and allies two years to complete the conquest of Syria with huge loss of life and the loss of at least 1 tumen in battle with Bedouins. Syria was a rich country and much more suitable for horse based mongol armies than Iraq. Now how after so much loss he would just abandon his conquests just like that? He tried and failed at least once in his lifetime to revenge what happened which contradicts your argument.

 

Finally, the Sons of Hulegu lead at least 6 devastating campaigns against the Mamlukes and gathered for them more troops than they did against the golden horde, that makes the mamlukes irrelevent especially that Maragha, the Ilkhanid capital, was just under 300 Km away from the nearest Mamluk outpost while it was nearly double that distance just from the frontier with the golden horde?

 

Al-Jassas

 

Now this doesn't mean that the wars with the golden horde didn't have an effect, they did but it was a temporary one, just enough for Baibars to consolidate power and reorganise his empire. Al-Maqrizi in his history mentions detailed letters between him and Berke about cooperation against Hulegu and mention that the action did help delay the mongol revenge but he maintains that such help wasn't as dicisive as you portray.

 

Al-Jassas

 

 

Kitbuga and his Mongol army, a small detachment of about 10,000 men, were lured into a trap at ʿAyn Jālūt (“Spring of Goliath”), near Nazareth, in Palestine, by a much larger Mamlūk force commanded by Baybars. The Mongols were destroyed, and Kitbuga was captured and killed. The Mamlūk victory was followed up by Muslim Syria, which then drove out its Mongol garrisons. Hülegü was unable to take reprisals, as he was preoccupied with an internal struggle for power within the Mongol empire, forcing him and much of his army to return to inner Asia. The Mongol empire was thus contained in Iran and Mesopotamia, leaving Egypt secure in Muslim Mamlūk hands.

 

But I have to say that Beibars indeed was the actual Mameluk commander in battle. Qutuz was "the commander in chief" of course; but the actual tactical command was administered by Beibars.