No More Learning



## p. 641 (#683) ############################################

Downfall of the Assassins
641
At the death of Kuyuk (1248) considerable confusion ensued; Kaidu,
grandson of Ogdai, and Chapar, son of Kaidu, successively held the
Khanate for short and troublous periods. Discontent among the nobles
and rival claims robbed the titular rulers of every shadow of authority, and
finally in 1251 Mangu, the son of Tulē, was elected Khan. The feud
between the houses of Jagatai and Ogdai was quelled and the house of
Ogdai ruled no more. The house of Tulē, youngest son of Jenghiz, now
took the lead.
The accession of Mangu brought a settlement to the political strife.
A period of prosperity followed. Rubruquis, whose visit happened at
this time, bears testimony that the luxury prevalent at Mangu's court
was not incompatible with the stability of the State, efficiency in govern-
ment, order and peace thoughout the Empire. Internal administration
was wise and popular. The Mongols were beginning to learn the lesson
of ruling as well as of conquering. But fresh conquests were soon under-
taken; a new outburst was ready.
Reference has already been made to the Assassins. The Mongols
decided that these dangerous foes could no longer be tolerated, and orders
for their extermination were given. Hūlāgū, the brother of Mangu, was
appointed for this work at the Kuriltai of 1252. He sent his chief
general Kitubuka in advance to invade Kūhistān, where the Assassins
were strongest, and after various military operations and the capture of
important towns and castles laid siege to Maimundiz, a fort of great
strength. Rukn-ad-Dīn, the head of the Assassins, surrendered to Hūlāgū.
Once in his power, Rukn-ad-Dīn was forced to dismantle all his fortresses
and strongholds, the investment of which might have caused the Mongols
some trouble. Later on he set out on a journey to Mangu, who refused
to receive him, and ultimately Rukn-ad-Dīn was slain on the homeward
journey. His end synchronised with the termination of the political
power of the Assassins.
Having freed the world from the Assassins, the Mongols advanced
against the citadel of Islām. Baghdad, the Rome of the Muslim faith,
vied with and surpassed Mecca in importance. The first four Caliphs
had ruled from Medina; the Umayyads who rose to power in 661 under
Mu‘āwiyah transferred the seat of government to Damascus. On the fall
of the Umayyads in 750 the capital was again changed, and Baghdad,
which was built by Manşūr in 762, became the centre of empire. The
position of the Caliph, or Successor to Mahomet, was in many respects
comparable to that of the Papacy. Endowed, at the outset, with temporal
well as spiritual power, the holders of the office were gradually divested
of the former. Lieutenants and governors made themselves independent;
separate states soon began to break the unity of the Empire of Islām.
But the spiritual ascendancy of the Caliphate maintained, to a far higher
degree than in the case of the Papacy, both the union of all Muslim
states and the authority of the Caliph in politics, international and
as
C. MED, H, VOL. IV, CB. XX.
41


## p. 642 (#684) ############################################

642
The fall of the Caliphate of Baghdad
domestic; it was the destruction of Baghdad by the Mongols that brought
the old Caliphate to an end. Resurrected by the Mamlūks of Egypt, it
was a shadow and the holder of the office a puppet, maintained in a
fettered pomp that scarcely concealed the name of captivity. Sultans
such as Baibars found the presence of a Caliph convenient in order to
legitimate their claims and procure popular support, but the power of
the Caliphate was gone. The Ottoman Turks, who conquered Egypt in
1517, compelled the last Abbasid, Mutawakkil, to resign his claims in
their favour. By virtue of this and of the possession of the sacred relics
of the Prophet, the Sultans at Constantinople claim to-day to be the
vice-gerents of Allāh over all Islām.
Yet in 1250 the Caliphate was still a formidable foe. Musta'sim,
who held the office, could count on the allegiance of many princes.
Egypt, Rūm, Fārs, Kirmān, Erbil, and Mosul were all loyal, although at
the time of Hūlāgū's attack several feudatories had accepted the Mongol
sway. Nevertheless many internal causes contributed to the downfall of
the Caliphate. The feud between Sunni and Shi'ah sapped the forces of
Islām. The Caliph, though devoted to luxury, was a pious recluse who
abandoned the affairs of state to his viziers; of these it must be said that
their conduct can only be cleared from the blackest treachery to Church
and State by the plea of almost incredible folly and ineptitude'. Hūlāgū
wrote to Musta'sim, accusing him of sheltering Mongol enemies and of
withholding support from the Mongols when they crushed the Assassins;
he also demanded complete submission and the dismantling of the
fortifications of Baghdad. To this the Caliph, mainly relying on mistaken
ideas of his powers and the amount of help that his vassals would afford,
returned a refusal couched in boastful terms. Hūlāgū advanced and
laid siege to Baghdad, which fell on 15 February 1258. The Caliph
suffered a terrible death; the city was given up to pillage and the in-
habitants to slaughter. The massacre exceeded even the usual Mongol
limits; 800,000 perished and scarcely a stone remained standing. Horror
and woe spread to the confines of Islām; no event in the annals of the
Faith roused such consternation. Baghdad was the centre of the arts;
literature and science found a home under the aegis of the Caliph. The
Muslim rulers fostered and endowed the humanities, and encouraged the
progress of civilisation at a time when Europe was swathed in obscurantism.
Philosophy and scholasticism flourished ; rhetoric and all forms of learn-
ing and education were cultivated. In the realms of art, learning, and
commerce, no less than in the sphere of religion, Baghdad was the cynosure
of all Muslim eyes; its fall brought about a complete re-arrangement in the
political world also. Fresh boundaries, alliances, and centres of government
had to be found. Yet the great catastrophe had some effects that were
beneficial. Cairo, the new focus of Islām, was nearer Europe and more
1 See Browne, E. G. , Literary History of Persia, 11. pp. 464 ff. , 484.


## p. 643 (#685) ############################################

Defeat of the Mongols by the Mamlūks, 1260
643
accessible. The scattering of Muslim savants, diffusing learning among
many places, gave the impetus to a renaissance in Islām. It gave Egypt
a short breathing-space to prepare for the Mongol attack, with the con-
sequence that the victory of Quțuz at 'Ain Jālūt in 1260, which warded
off the danger from Egypt, saved Christendom as well; the signal service
that the Sultan of Egypt rendered to Europe was beyond the power of
any Western king to accomplish.
The fall of Baghdad was the prelude to the invasion of Syria. Even
so great an object-lesson failed to teach the Muslims the necessity of
union. The feud between Shi'ah and Sunnī still continued, carefully
fostered by the Mongols to their own advantage. Hūlāgū favoured the
former, and took precautions to preserve the tomb of 'Ali from destruc-
tion. Some of the princes of Syria submitted. Nāşir Şalāḥ-ad-Dīn
Yusuf, a descendant of the famous Saladin (Şalāḥ-ad-Dīn), who was
prince of Aleppo and also of Damascus, defied the Mongols and prepared
to offer a brave resistance. He sent his wives to Egypt, where the Sultan
Quțuz protected them, and gathered an army for battle, north of
Damascus. But under the influence of terror his men fled; Hūlāgū
marched to Aleppo, capturing and destroying as he went. The town fell
and was razed to the ground; death or captivity was the lot of the victims.
Damascus surrendered and was spared. Antioch surrendered but was
destroyed. A terrible famine and pestilence broke out and completed the
devastation of Syria, Mesopotamia, and the surrounding lands. Hūlāgū
meditated a march on Jerusalem and probably after that a campaign
against Egypt; but while at Aleppo the news of the death of Mangu
reached him. He was obliged to return for the great Kuriltai, just as the
death of Ogdai had previously recalled Bātu. The leadership of the
Mongol army was given to Ketbogha.
Quțuz, the Sultan of Egypt at this time, 1260, was a Khwārazmian
Mamlūk, who had displaced the son of Aibak and seized the throne.
Roused by the approach of the foe, he gathered an army and anticipated
their attack. The Mamlūks advanced to Acre, where they reckoned on
the support of the Crusaders. The latter were too timid to offer any aid,
and the burden of the war lay on Quțuz alone. At ‘Ain Jālūt (1260)
the armies met. The bravery of Quțuz and of Baibars, his general, won
the day and Ketbogha was slain. For the first time in history the Mongols
were fairly and indisputably beaten in a decisive battle. The effect was
magical. Wherever the news of the Mamlūk victory became known,
men gave themselves up to the wildest transports of rejoicing. The spell
was broken at last, and it was clear that the superhuman power, claimed
by Mongol boasts and credited by the fears of their victims, was a myth.
Damascus rose and cast off the Mongol yoke. The Mamlūks did not
remain satisfied with the fruits of a single victory. The Mongols, broken
and crushed, were driven out of Syria beyond Emesa. Quțuz reinstated,
where possible, the former officials as governors under his command and
CH. XX.
41-2


## p. 644 (#686) ############################################

644
Hülāgū and the Il-khāns
reduced the country to order. His return was a triumphant progress;
he was accompanied by prayers and thanksgiving. Wherever he passed
signs of popular joy were manifest. Extraordinary preparations were
made to welcome the conqueror. As he drew nearer to his own kingdom
the celebrations became grander, and the decorations of the towns and
villages increasingly costly. All Cairo united to honour its victorious
ruler as no other before, but Quțuz was treacherously robbed of the fruits
of his victory. He was stabbed by his general Baibars, who usurped his
master's throne and rode into Cairo, a second Zimri, amid the plaudits
destined for his murdered lord. The erstwhile Mamlūk slave, who had
saved the proud sovereigns of Europe and had succeeded in a task which
they dared not undertake, fell a victim in the height of his glory to the
dagger of another slave.
The land which Hūlāgū had conquered became his own, and he re-
tained possession of such parts as were not recaptured from him. The
dynasty which he founded in Persia ruled for several generations under
the title of Il-khāns, acknowledging the Khan of the Eastern Mongols as
their overlord. In 1282 Aḥmad Khān became a Muslim. Islām had
entirely permeated Persia by 1295, when Ghāzān Khān succeeded to the
throne, but it did not altogether eradicate many superstitions. Ghāzān
broke off his allegiance to the Supreme Khan. The inauguration of in-
dependence by the Īl-khāns is marked by the alteration in the legend on
their coins. Ábū-Sa'id (1316) was the last of the great Īl-khāns, and after
his death (1335) the kingdom split into petty states, which by 1400
were incorporated by Tīmūr in his dominions.
In the meanwhile there had been considerable military activity on the
eastern borders of the Empire. Reference has been made to the continual
hostilities that disturbed the relations between the Sung Dynasty in
Southern China and the Mongols. In 1252 the latter ordered a great
forward movement. Kublai, the brother of Mangu, was to advance into
Yunnan, a province outside the Sung borders to the south-west, and in
1253 he assembled his forces at Shensi as a preliminary step. The
Mongols were favoured with their usual success, but Kublai was a man
of different temperament from his predecessors. He saw that the policy of
wanton destruction and indiscriminate slaughter, though effective for in-
spiring terror in the foe and thus aiding the conqueror, was inimical to
the future government of the captured area. It was easier to rule a settled
country than a desert waste. Industry and commerce can be overthrown
with ease and speed, but cannot be revived except with infinite trouble
and delay. Moreover Kublai's nature was averse to bloodshed. His
ambition sought to effect great conquests with the minimum loss of life.
Thus Tali, an important city of Nanchao in Yunnan, was taken by him
without causing a single death. After this exploit Kublai returned to
Mangu, leaving the famous general Uriang Kadai, the son of Sabutai, to
continue the campaign. With various intervals the war continued until


## p. 645 (#687) ############################################

Mangu
645
1257. The Mongols captured Annam (Tongking) in 1257, and achieved
many successes. Kublai, who had been appointed governor at Honan,
had not abandoned his policy of conciliation. The popularity which he
gained from the wise and considerate treatment of his subjects provoked
the jealousy of Mangu, who sent a Mongol called Alemdar from Kara-
korum to supersede Kublai. The latter, however, returned to Mangu,
and by tact and submission recovered the favour of the Khan and the
position of which he had been deprived.
In this same year, 1257, Mangu held a Kuriltai and determined to
lead the army against the Sung. Kublai accompanied him, and three
strong forces invaded the province of Suchuan. Two years were spent in
conquests, and in the Mongol operations the gentle spirit of Kublai
asserted itself. Finally, in 1259 siege was laid to Hochau at the junction
of the Kialing and the Feu, near the point where these rivers join the
Yangtse Kiang. The besiegers suffered much from dysentery, and Mangu
himself succumbed to the disease. The funeral procession, which bore
the dead Khan to his last resting-place at Burkan Kaldun, according to
previous custom slew all whom they met en route, to prevent the intel-
ligence of the death of the Khan from preceding the bier.
Mangu's sudden death created some difficulty in the appointment of
a successor. The vast extent of the Empire prevented a Kuriltai from
being summoned at once. According to the Mongol custom, the new
Khan should be chosen from among the brothers of Mangu, and of these
Hūlāgū was in Syria, Kublai in China. Of Mangu's other brothers, the
next in age to Hūlāgū was Arik buka, who was in command at Karakorum.
To him Kublai sent, asking for reinforcements and supplies. Arikbuka
complied and sent Kublai an invitation to attend the Kuriltai which
had been convoked at Karakorum to elect a new Khan. Kublai, fearing
a trap, declined and summoned a Kuriltai of his own at Shangtu. To this
assembly neither Hūlāgū nor the descendants of Jagatai were invited,
owing to the time which must elapse before they could attend. The
conduct of the war rendered it imperative that a new head should be
chosen for the state without delay. Kublai was elected for this office
with the usual pomp and festivities. The election was scarcely valid, as
the entire electorate was not present. Of the absentees, Hūlāgū acquiesced,
but Arikbuka and the supporters of the houses of Jagatai and Ogdai
were disaffected.
Nevertheless Kublai was on the throne, and his reign lasted thirty-
five years. His achievements were considerable, and he ruled over a
wider extent than any Mongol or indeed any other sovereign. He was
the first to govern by peaceful means. By this time the head of the
Mongols had become invested with the state of an Emperor. The
splendour of his court and the magnificence of his entourage easily sur-
passed that of any Western ruler. The change though gradual was now
accomplished. It was strikingly significant of Mongol development. The
CH. XX.


## p. 646 (#688) ############################################

646
The reign of Kublai
rude leader of nomads, governing by the sword, with no thoughts of
settlement but only of rapine and conquest, had given place to a cultured
monarch, eager for the good government of his subjects and the prosperity
of his kingdom.
The beginning of his reign found him assailed by civil war. Arikbuka
raised the standard of rebellion and collected a large force. Kublai and
his generals were active; their clemency gained over many of Arikbuka's
followers, who were enraged at the cruelties that he perpetrated. Arikbuka
was defeated in 1261 but spared. Again he rebelled and again he was
defeated (1264). He came in utter abasement to Kublai, who par-
doned him once more, but soon afterwards he died. At his death all the
other rebels submitted, with the exception of Kaidu. The war with the
Sung Dynasty was a legacy to Kublai from his late brother. When the
news of the death of Mangu reached Kublai, he was besieging Wuchang.
The Chinese general concluded a treaty with him but did not inform
the Chinese Emperor of the terms of peace. It was agreed that Kublai
should retreat, leaving Wuchang seemingly unconquered, on condition
that the Emperor paid tribute and acknowledged the Mongol Khan as
overlord. In view of Arikbuka's rebellion Kublai accepted the con-
ditions. Later on he sent to demand their fulfilment, but the Chinese
Emperor, having no knowledge of any treaty, naturally repudiated
Kublai's claims. After various delays, hostilities were resumed in 1267
and continued with great vigour. Finally, in 1279, after many victories
and conquests, the whole country was subjugated, the young Emperor
being drowned in the last naval battle. The whole of China was now in
the hands of the Mongols. They were successful in Korea and in Burma,
both of which were subdued, but the expeditions to Java and Japan re-
sulted in failure.
Kublai was a generous patron of literature. The culture and re-
ligion of China had great attractions for him. While Islām was making
headway among the Western Mongols, Buddhism was encroaching from
the East. Hūlāgū became a Muslim and Kublai a Buddhist; thus
Shamanism was threatened on both sides. The name of Lama was given
by the Mongols to the Buddhist priests. Kublai introduced the Chinese
ritual of ancestor-worship, and built a large temple in which Jenghiz,
Ogdai, and the other Khans were commemorated and worshipped. He also
ordered that the Uighur characters should be discarded, since he deemed
it beneath the dignity of the Mongols to use a script borrowed from
foreigners. In 1269 a new national mode of writing was invented by the
chief Lama and published. Kublai's encouragement of learning was
remarkable. He caused Jamal-ad-Dīn, a Persian astronomer, to draw up
a calendar; he founded an academy and schools. The Chinese classics
were translated at his bidding, and a history of the Mongols compiled in
order to familiarise the young men with the exploits of their ancestors.
An administrative council of twelve was set up, with the object of assisting


## p. 647 (#689) ############################################

Kublai's government
647
רל
the Khan in state affairs; the vast empire was sub-divided into twelve
provinces, so as to secure effective local government by decentralisation.
The postal service was maintained with great care; hostelries, horses,
couriers, and vehicles were provided throughout the Empire. Perhaps the
most abiding memorial to the greatness of Kublai was the new capital
that he built near Yenkin, which had been the capital of the Chinese
sovereigns. The city that he created was known by the names Tatu
(Daitu or Taitu) or “Great Court,” Khan Balig (Kambalu, Cam-
baluk) or “Khan's town," and Pekin. The description of this wonderful
town given by Marco Polo seems reminiscent of the marvels of the
Arabian Nights; he too gave the inspiration of Coleridge's lines, “In
Xanadu did Kubla Khan a stately pleasure-dome decree. ” The currency
was reformed, block-printing, far in advance of Europe, being utilised
for the paper coinage. The army was re-organised, and a valuable system
of roads and canals constructed. Trees were planted in many places for
the benefit of the public; the welfare of the subject was now the chief
care of the ruler. Every act of Kublai, in politics, government, war,
court ceremonial, literature, religion, and personal habits, shews clearly
how far the Mongol state had progressed. The nomads had become
civilised, but they had abandoned their chief characteristics. Islām on
the one hand, Buddhism on the other, Arabic culture and Chinese civili-
sation, had slowly permeated and transformed them. The establish-
ment of the courts of Hūlāgū and of Kublai marked a great change.
Karakorum gave place to Persia and to Pekin. The transfer changed
the habits of the Mongols, and this was the beginning of the disintegra-
tion of the Empire.
Civilisation involved a loss of military power, for the
Mongols lost their hardihood with their brutality. The very size of the
Empire rendered unity impossible. The nomads settled down and
remained savage peasants or became more cultured, according as their
geographical position rendered them susceptible to outside influences or
not. The barbarian at home was cut off by a growing barrier of civili-
sation from his fellow-Mongol at the fringe of the Empire. A comparison
between the soldiers of Jenghiz and the subjects of Kublai is valuable.
Under Jenghiz and his immediate successors, the army was a machine
for rapine and destruction. The range of the Mongol arms, the distance
from home at which they fought, the long stretch of desert which they
had to traverse, their energy and insensibility to the most exhausting
hardships, their resolution and inflexible obedience to the plans and
commands which, neither deterred by misfortune nor seduced by victory,
they invariably carried into execution, cannot fail to impress the student
of their history. Yet it cannot be denied that the efficiency of the
Mongols as a military organisation was only attained at the expense
of their development in other spheres. The progress of civilisation among
them was imperceptible until the age of Kublai. The growth of culture
and the humane arts can scarcely be traced; in comparison to the high
CH. XX.


## p. 648 (#690) ############################################

648
Change in the Mongols
level which existed among their Chinese neighbours and the Muslim
nations it is altogether negligible. Neither sporadic instances of luxury
at the court of the Khan, the result of the mass of booty, nor the royal
patronage and care in fostering scientific institutions, can be taken as
indicative of the general Mongol attitude to culture. Military prowess
turned the whole nation into a marvellous fighting organisation, brutal,
mechanical, but invincible; lacking the brilliancy and dash of Napoleon's
armies, animated by the lust for plunder and slaughter, stimulated by
blind and terrorised obedience rather than by the call of patriotism.
History can furnish many instances of victorious nations being educated
by contact with their captives, to whom the conquerors were inferior in
culture. But the Mongols were thus influenced to a very small extent,
for their wars were outbursts of extermination and desolation; no victims
survived their fury to teach them valuable lessons and react on their
masters; the civilisation of the conquered lay buried under ghastly corpse
heaps and beneath the ashes of ruined cities.
The age of Kublai, as has already been shewn, was different in character.
Captives were spared, and conquered provinces were administered with a
regard to the well-being of their inhabitants rather than to the mere pos-
sibilities of plunder and extortion. Literature and civilisation flourished,
and higher forms of religion began to pervade the state. The old Mongol
spirit was dead save in Central Asia, and the new Mongol Empire was soon
destined to fall in pieces. The estimate of Howorth is well worth citing:
“In reviewing the life of Khubilai, we can hardly avoid the conclusion
which has been drawn by a learned authority on his reign, that we have
before us rather a great Chinese Emperor than a Mongol Khan. A
Chinese Emperor, it is true, wielding resources such as no other Emperor
in Chinese history ever did, yet sophisticated and altered by contact with
that peculiar culture which has vanquished eventually all the stubborn
conquerors of China. Great as he was in his power, and in the luxury and
magnificence of his court, he is yet by no means the figure in the world's
history that Jingis and Ogotai were. Stretching out their hands with
fearful effect over a third of the human race, their history is entwined with
our western history much more than his. Big as the heart of the vast
empire was, it was too feeble to send life into its extremities for
very
long, and in viewing the great Khakan at the acme of his power, we feel
that we shall not have long to wait before it will pass away. The
kingdoms that had been conquered so recently in the West were already
growing cold towards him, and were more in form than in substance his
This was no doubt inevitable, the whole was too unwieldy, its
races too heterogeneous, its interests too various. Yet we cannot avoid
thinking that the process was hastened by that migration from the desert
to the luxurious south, from Karakorum to Tatu and Shangtung which
Khubilai effected, and which speedily converted a royal race of warriors
into a race of decrepit sensualists. "
own.


## p. 649 (#691) ############################################

Fall of the Mongols in China
649
Kublai died in 1294, at the age of eighty, having reigned thirty-
five years. After his death the history of the Mongols ceases to call for
much detailed comment. The reigns of his successors are of little interest
to the general historian, for the Empire begins to pass from the zenith of its
power and it remains but to trace the course of decay. Within fifty
years of the death of Kublai the Empire was smitten by a series of floods
and earthquakes. The Mongol power weakened and rebellion spread.
In 1355 a Buddhist priest raised an army in China to drive out the
Mongols. Korea joined in the revolt and Pekin was captured. The Khan
fled and made good his escape, but the Mongol troops were driven out.
In 1368 the revolution was over. A new dynasty, called the Ming or
“Bright,” was set up, and the priest who had led the revolt became Em-
peror (Hung-Wu). The descendants of Jenghiz were driven away for ever.
But worse was in store. Hung-Wu carried the campaign beyond his own
confines. The Eastern Mongols were vigorously attacked and continually
beaten. In the reign of Biliktu (died 1378) the Mongols were expelled
from Liau Tung. He was succeeded in the next year by Ussakhal, who
was slain after the great disaster that overtook the Mongols at Lake
Buyur, when the Chinese completely broke the power of their former
conquerors. Hereafter the supremacy passed from one branch of the
Mongols to another. They became scattered and autonomous, except in
so far as the jurisdiction of the Chinese compelled their obedience. Yet
the tale of disruption is illuminated by occasional flashes of the old
Mongol greatness. The Mongols, who were driven to the North by the
Ming, gradually recovered and measured their strength with the foe.
They raided Tibet and China, and one of the results of these expeditions
was to bring them more into touch with Buddhism. In 1644 the Ming
Dynasty was overthrown by the Manchus, who ruled China until the recent
proclamation of the republic; the Manchus effectually subdued the
Eastern Mongols, who henceforward are merged in the Chinese Empire.
The Mongol Empire can scarcely be said ever to have formed a homo-
geneous unity; for this reason it is impossible to deal with all those tribes
bearing the common designation Mongol or Tartar as a single corporate
body. It is difficult to get a general view and to place isolated incidents
in their proper setting. This difficulty in finding a true perspective involves
a certain amount of individual treatment of the various tribes, and from
the time of Kublai onward the historian is compelled to trace the
course of the scattered bodies one by one. The fate of the successors of
Kublai has been recounted. It now remains to deal with various other
branches of the Mongol Confederacy.
The Khalkhas, or Central Mongols, whose territory was the ancient
Mongol home, where Jenghiz had begun his career, after diplomatic re-
lations with Russia and contact with Christianity, were finally merged
in the Chinese Empire at the conference of Tolonor. To this great
meeting the Emperor Kang-hi summoned the chiefs of the Khalkhas in
CH. XX.


## p. 650 (#692) ############################################

650
The western Mongols: Tīmūr
1691, and with great ceremony they performed the “kowtow” in the
imperial presence; with this act their separate existence as a nation came
to an end.
The Keraits and Torgods for a long period were distracted by internal
feuds. The kingdom of the mysterious Prester John, who has been identi-
fied with Wang Khan, is placed in their land. Later they had diplomatic
and also hostile relations with Russia, Turkey, and the Cossacks. Ayuka
Khan, one of their great leaders, invaded the Russian territory as far as
Kazan, but made peace with Peter the Great at Astrakhan in 1722. After
some time, however, fear of the Russians and discontent at their
oppressions caused them to adopt the expedient of wholesale emigration.
The extraordinary spectacle was witnessed of 70,000 families breaking up
their homes and marching away with all their chattels. The old nomad
spirit seemed to have revived. They travelled to China where they were
most hospitably received, but the price paid for release from Russian tyranny
was the surrender of their nationality. China completely assimilated them.
Thus China, Russia, and the steppes were absorbing or scattering great
divisions of the former Mongol Empire.
Of the western Mongols, importance centres round the descendants
of Jagatai, who passed through many vicissitudes until the rise of Tīmūr
Leng (Tīmūr the lame), or Timurlane (Tamerlane, Tamburlaine), of
Samarqand. In the year 1336, scarcely more than a century after the
death of Jenghiz Khan, Tīmūr was born at Kesh in Transoxiana, to the
south of Samarqand. The Mongol hold of Central Asia was still firm,
but disintegration was spreading rapidly. It was the destiny of Tīmūr
to rouse the Mongols to fresh exploits and distant victories. The direct
result of his invasion of India was the rise of the Mongol Dynasty at Delhi,
better known as the Moguls. Much light is thrown on Tīmūr and his
reign by the narrative of Ruy Gonzalez de Clavijo, who came on an
embassy to his court in the years 1403–6.
Besides this, there are several accounts of the great conqueror, but
they are mostly ex parte statements written either by inveterate enemies
or flattering court scribes. Yet it is not difficult to form a fair estimate
of the man. In his youth he had the benefit of a fair education. He
was as versed in literature as he was proficient in military skill. He was
a Muslim by faith, but had no scruples about attacking and slaughtering
his co-religionists. At the outset of his career, from about 1358 onward,
he had to struggle for supremacy among the scattered tribes of the neigh-
bourhood and the hordes to the north of the Jaxartes. In this he may
be compared to Jenghiz. By dint of persistence he succeeded in becoming
supreme among the Jagatai tribes, and in 1369, having overcome
and slain Husain, his brother-in-law and former ally, he was proclaimed
sovereign at Balkh and ruled in Samarqand. He was now at the age of
thirty-three, and he waged incessant warfare for the next thirty years.
The chief of his exploits was the celebrated invasion of India. Tīmūr


## p. 651 (#693) ############################################

Conquest of India : defeat of the Ottomans
651
was prompted by the double motive of zeal to spread the faith and the
prospect of rich plunder. He crossed the Indus in 1398, after having
passed the mountains of Afghanistan. Multān was conquered and the
Musulman leader Shihāb-ad-Dīn defeated. After other victories, notably
the capture of Bhatnir, the road to Delhi lay open. Before the gates
the army of Sultan Muḥammad of Delhi was drawn up under the
famous general Mallu Khān; against Mongol ferocity the bravery of the
Indians was useless, and after a bloody battle Tīmūr entered Delhi on
17 December 1398. The sack of Delhi and the massacre of the inhabitants
followed, and utter ruin spread far and wide. It is said that for the next
fifty years the country was so impoverished that the mints ceased to issue
gold and silver coins; copper currency sufficed for the needs of the miser-
able survivors.
Tīmūr did not stay long. Passing along the flank of the Himalayas
he captured Meerut and returned to Samarqand through Kashmir. In
the Khutbah, or prayer for the reigning monarch that is recited every
Friday in the mosques, the names of Tīmūr and his descendants were
inserted, thus legitimising the subsequent claims of Bābur.
From Samarqand Tīmūr soon marched to the west. In 1401 Baghdad
was taken and sacked, the horrors almost equalling the scenes enacted
under Hūlāgū. The captives were beheaded and towers constructed of
the heads as a warning, but mosques, colleges, and hospitals were spared.
Karbalā and Aleppo were taken and Damascus destroyed, Persia and
Kurdistān were reconquered. He reduced the Mongols round the shores
of the Caspian and penetrated to the banks of the Ural and the Volga.
Advancing through Asia Minor, he met the Ottoman Sultan Bāyazīd I,
then at the height of his power, at Angora in 1402.
The Turks were
beaten and the Sultan captured. Tīmūr dragged the fallen monarch after
him to grace his triumph; according to the story utilised by Marlowe, he
was imprisoned in a cage. Tīmūr, now in his seventieth year, next planned
a great expedition to China. He actually set out on the march, but died in
1405 at Otrar near Kashgar. His atrocities were enormous but not com-
parable to those of other Mongol Khans. He made no attempt to con-
solidate his conquests, and after his death the decay was quick. Samar-
qand and Transoxiana were ruled by his son and grandson, but the
various petty dynasties that soon arose weakened each other by warfare.
Finally Muhammad Shaibānī or Shāhī Beg, the head of the Uzbeg
Mongols, captured Samarqand and Bukhārā and between 1494 and 1500
displaced all the dynasties of the Tīmūrids.
Parallel to the advance of Buddhism in the East, was the growth of
Islān in the West. Nowhere did the faith of Mahomet find more
fruitful soil than among the Il-khāns of Persia, who traced their descent
to Hūlāgū, the conqueror of Baghdad. Between Egypt and the Il-khāns
there was often warfare. In 1303 Nāşir, Sultan of Egypt, overthrew a
Mongol army at Marj-as-Suffar. But the relations between the two
CH. XX.


## p. 652 (#694) ############################################

652
The Golden Horde
powers were sometimes friendly. The same Nāșir made an extradition
treaty with Abū-Saʻīd, the nephew of Ghāzān, whose army had been
defeated at Marj-as-Suffar. The smaller states which succeeded the
Il-khāns were finally swept away by Tīmūr before 1400.
The descendants of the victorious general Bātu were the famous
Golden Horde or Western Kipchaks. Bātu ruled from Lake Balkash to
Hungary. He was succeeded in 1255 by his brother Bereke, in whose
reign a crusade against the Mongols was preached by the Pope. But the
Mongols carried the war into the enemy's country and invaded Poland
and Silesia. Cracow and Beuthen were captured and vast masses of slaves
were led away. The result of these operations was that the Mongols main-
tained a suzerainty over the Russians. Several European princes and
princesses intermarried with them; they were on friendly terms with the
Sultans of Egypt, perhaps owing to the hostility between the Mamlūks and
the Il-khāns. In 1382 Tuqtāmish sacked Moscow and several important
Russian towns, but the campaign of slaughter was resented by Tīmūr
his overlord, who utterly crushed him. Gradually all these Mongol tribes
were absorbed by Russia or the Ottoman Turks, but from the Uzbegs on
the Caspian Bābur set forth on his journey to India and founded the
Indian Empire of the Moguls, to which Sir Thomas Roe was sent on an
embassy in 1615–1619. The lingering Khanates were crushed by the
expansion of Russia, and either as subjects or protectorates have lost all
independence.


## p. 653 (#695) ############################################

653
CHAPTER XXI.
THE OTTOMAN TURKS TO THE FALL OF CONSTANTINOPLE.
It was in 1299 that Osmān (Othmān, 'Uthmān) declared himself
Emir of the Turks, that is, of the tribe over which he ruled. The
Seljūq Turks have been treated in a previous chapter ; but there
were many other Turkish tribes present in the middle and at the end
of the thirteenth century in Asia Minor and Syria, and, in order to
understand the conditions under which the Ottoman Turks advanced and
became a nation, a short notice of the condition of Anatolia at that
time is necessary. The country appeared indeed to be everywhere overrun
with Turks. A constant stream of Turkish immigrants had commenced
to flow from the south-west of Central Asia during the eleventh century,
and continued during the twelfth and indeed long after the capture
of Constantinople. Some of these went westward to the north of the
Black Sea, while those with whom we are concerned entered Asia
Minor through the lands between the Persian Gulf and the Black Sea.
They were nomads, some travelling as horsemen, others on foot or with
primitive ox-waggons. Though they seem to have left Persia in large
bodies, yet, when they reached Anatolia, they separated into small isolated
bands under chieftains. Once they had obtained passage through Georgia
or Armenia or Persia into Asia Minor, they usually turned southwards,
attracted by the fertile and populous plains of Mesopotamia, though they
avoided Baghdad so long as that city was under a Caliph. Thence they
spread through Syria into Cilicia, which was then largely occupied by
Armenians under their own princes, and into Egypt itself. Several of
these tribes crossed the Taurus, usually through the pass known as the
Cilician Gates, and thereupon entered the great tableland, three thousand
feet above sea-level, which had been largely occupied by the Seljūms. By
1150, the Turks had spread over all Asia Minor and Syria. These early
Turks were disturbed by the huge and well-organised hordes of mounted
warriors and foot-soldiers under Jenghiz Khan, a Mongol belonging to
the smallest of the four great divisions of the Tartar race, but whose
followers were mainly Turks. The ruin of the Seljūqs of Rūm may be said
to date from the great Mongol invasion in 1242, in which Armenia
was conquered and Erzerūm occupied. The invading chief exercised
the privilege of the conqueror, and gave the Seljūq throne of Rūm to the
CH. XXI.


## p. 654 (#696) ############################################

654 Infiltration of Turkish nomads into Asia Minor
younger brother of the Sultan instead of to the elder. The Emperor in Con-
stantinople supported the latter, and fierce war was waged between the two
brothers. A resident, somewhat after the Indian analogy, was appointed
by the Khan of the Mongols to the court of the younger brother.
The war contributed to the weakening of the Seljūqs, and facilitated
the encroachment of the nomad Turkish bands, who owned no master,
upon their territory. The Latin occupation of Constantinople (1204–
1261) had the same effect, for the Latin freebooters shewed absolutely
no power of dealing with the Turks, their energies being engaged
simply in making themselves secure in the capital and a portion of its
European territory. Hūlāgū, the grandson of Jenghiz Khan, captured
Baghdad in 1258 and destroyed the Empire of the Caliphs. He
extended his rule over Mesopotamia and North Syria to the Medi-
terranean. The dispersion of the new Turkish hordes not only greatly
increased the number of nomads in Asia Minor, but led to the establish-
ment of additional independent Turkish tribes under their own rulers,
or emirs, and to an amount of confusion and disorder in Asia Minor
such as had not previously been seen under the Greek Empire. The
chieftain and his tribe usually seized a strong position, an old forti-
fied town for example, held it as their headquarters, refused to own alle-
giance to the Emperor or any other than their immediate chieftain, and
from it as their centre plundered the inhabitants of the towns and the
neighbouring country. The tribes shewed little tendency to coalesce.
Each emir fought on his own account, plundered on all the roads where
travellers passed, or demanded toll or ransom for passage or release. In
this want of cohesion is to be found one explanation of the fact that
though the Turks were defeated one day, yet they emerge with apparently
equal strength a short time after in another place. They had to be
fought in detail in their respective centres or as wandering tribes.
During the thirteenth century many such groups of Turks occupied
what a Greek writer calls “the eyes of the country. ” Even as far south
as Aleppo there was such an occupation by a tribe with a regular Turkish
dynasty. Some such chiefs, established on the western shores of the
Aegean, not only occupied tracts of country, but built fleets and ravaged
the islands of the Archipelago. During the half century preceding the
accession of Osmān, Tenedos, Chios, Samos, and Rhodes fell at various
times to these Turkish tribes. Some of them, who had occupied during the
same period the southern and western portions of the central highland of
Asia Minor, met with great success. Qaramān established his rule around
the city of Qaramān, whose strongly fortified and interesting castle still
stands, a noble ruin, on the plain about sixty-four miles south-east of Qonya.
But the same Qaramān ruled over a district extending for a time to the
north-west as far as, and including, Philadelphia. Indeed, he and his
successors were for perhaps half a century the most powerful Turks in
Asia Minor. Other chiefs or emirs ruled in Germiyān, at Attalia (called


## p. 655 (#697) ############################################

Ertughril
655
Satalia by the crusaders), at Tralles, now called after its emir Aidīn,
and at Magnesia. The shores of the Aegean opposite Lesbos and
large strips of country on the south of the Black Sea were during
the same period under various Turkish emirs. The boundaries of the
territories over which they ruled often changed, as the tribes were
constantly at war with each other or in search of new pasture. Needless
to say, the effect of the establishment of so many wandering hordes of
fighting men unused to agriculture was disastrous to the peaceful
population of the country they had invaded. The rule of the Empire in
such districts was feeble, the roads were unsafe, agriculture diminished,
and the towns decayed. The nomad character of these isolated tribes
makes it impossible to give a satisfactory estimate of their numbers on
the accession of Osmān. The statements of Greek and Turkish writers
on the subject are always either vague or untrustworthy.
Three years before Osmān assumed the title of emir, namely in 1296,
Pachymer reports that the Turks had devastated the whole of the country
between the Black Sea and the territory opposite Rhodes. Even two
centuries earlier similar statements had been made. For example, William
of Tyre after describing Godfrey of Bouillon's siege of Nicaea in 1097
says the Turks lost 200,000 men. Anna Comnena tells of the slaughter
of 24,000 around Philadelphia in 1108; four years later a great band of
them were utterly destroyed. Matthew of Edessa in 1118 describes an
“innumerable army of Turks” as marching towards that city. It would
be easy to multiply these illustrations. The explanation is to be found
in the nomadic habits of the invaders, and in the fact already noted
that there was a constant stream of immigration from Asia.
The tribe over which Osmān ruled was one which had entered Asia
Minor previous to Jenghiz Khan's invasion. His ancestors had been
pushed by the invaders southward to Mesopotamia, but like so many
others of the same race continued to be nomads. They were adventurers,
desirous of finding pasturage for their sheep and cattle, and ready to sell
their services to any other tribe. The father of Osmān, named Ertughril,
had probably employed his tribe in the service of the Sultan ‘Alā-ad-Dīn
of Rūm, who had met with much opposition from other Turkish tribes.
According to Turkish historians, he had surprised Maurocastrum, now
known as Afyon-Qara-Hisār, a veritable Gibraltar rising out of the
central Phrygian plain about one hundred miles from Eski-Shehr (Dory-
laeum)? Ertughril's deeds, however, as related in the Turkish annais,
are to be read with caution. He became the first national hero of the
Turks, was a Ghāzī, and the victories gained by others are accredited
to him. They relate that he captured Bilijik, Āq-Gyul (Philomelium),
Yeni-Shehr, Lefke (Leucae), Aq-Hisār (Asprocastrum), and Givē
(Gaiucome).
1 Jorga, Geschichte des osmanischen Reiches, 1. p. 51.
CH. XXI.