Mongols and Mamluks
The Mamluks occupied the Egypt and Syrian region in the 1200s AD. They unfortunately were in constant interaction, often through battles with the Mongols from Persia. The Mongols were mainly nomadic people living within the Eurasian Steppes and Western Asia, during the Medieval times between the 11th and 16th century (Amitai 1). The study of the two cultures reveals that they profoundly influenced the culture, politics, and ethnic aspects of the region following their constant settlement and invasions especially during the Il-Khanid period between 1258 and 1335. The constant conflicts and interactions between the Mongols and Mamluks led to the forging of close cultural and economic ties in the Eurasian region. This essay explores the relationship between the two societies and discusses the impact of their interactions on their communities, the region and each other.
The Mamluks of the 1260-1382 AD were a military society that had their main barracks on the Roda Island in the Nile. They were a force to be reckoned with in the Egyptian and Syrian region. However, in the mid 13th century, they faced the terror and destruction of the Mongol horde that was advancing to Egypt and Syria, under the leadership of Hulagu, the grandson to Genghis Khan (McGregor 15). Historical records indicate that the Mongols attempted at invading Syria, during the expansion of their empire southwards (Amitai 1). They made several attempts in “1260, 1281, 1299, 1300, 1303, and 1312 AD” (Amitai 1). Though they had conquered several regions of Eurasian, the invasion of Syria was a failure, such that the only victory they had been at Wadi Al-Khaznadar in 1299 AD, and did not lead to their occupation of Syria (Amitai 10). The failure to capture Syria was due to the resistance and force of the Mumluks who were, under the Sultanate’s oath, to defend Islam and the Kingdom. The Mumluks and Mongols interaction and conflict in the Syrian region was a longstanding cold war marked by military genius of both sides.
The Mumluks and Mongol’s confrontations and conflicts on either side of the Syrian border were interplay of diplomatic maneuvers, subterfuge, psychological warfare, espionage, and propaganda war. The two groups engaged each other in ideological posturing and aggressive warfare propaganda to gain a large alliance with tribes and local communities in an attempt to build large armies against the enemy (Amitai 1). In the process, the Mongols received support from mainly the Christian and Buddhist communities while the Mumluks received support from the Turks and Islamic communities in the near east (McGregor 17). The Mamluks did vigorously defend Syria and the Islamic world, causing a lack of success on the Mongols’ side in conquering Eurasian and the whole of Europe.
It is worthy to note that, despite the difficult resistance set by the Mamluks, the Mongols did not give up, but continually pursued their goals of conquering Syria. The opinion of this essay that the Mongols and Mamluks may have been different in structure, background, political, social, and military make up, but were similar in military might and determination. An analysis of events surrounding the two institutions’ interaction and conflicts show that they were both determined to defend their interests and meet the visions of their societies and leaders. The Mamluks and Mongols were military forces that shaped and changed the history of the Eurasian region or Europe in the middle ages. However, despite this military might, the Mamluks and Mongols had fundamental differences.
To understand the differences between the Mumluks and the Mongols, and their eventual interaction and conflicts, it is essential to establish the role played by each institution. The Mamluk institution was an essential organization for the Eurasian Steppe as it enforced and enhanced the Islamic way of life, expanded Islamic boundaries, and the shaping of Islamic culture and politics. This is because the Mamluks assisted the Eurasian people, especially the Turks to establish the Islamic world, by expanding into the regions of Black Africa, Anatolia, and India (Amitai 29). Historical and religious literature showed that the Mamluks may have been slaves and pagans, but were the main force behind the expelling of the crusaders from the Eurasian Steppe, especially Egypt and North Africa in the medieval period (McGregor 20). Moreover, the institution was central in the discouragement of the west from conquering the advancing into the near east, thereby preserving the traditions, political, and social systems in this region. The Mamluks from Egypt, where the only force in Eurasia able to withstand the force and aggression of the Mongols for decades (Amitai 30). It is belief that the value of the Mamluks is not only limited to the Egyptian region, but also is an institution that assisted the Ottoman empire to conquer southeast Europe. In addition, the Mamluks are believed to have led to the first peaceful expansion of Islam into the regions of Africa and Indonesia. History academics like Atamai Reuven, believe that were it, not for the interference of the Turks and Mongols, the Mumluks would have assisted a peaceful spread of Islam (Atamai 30), changing the history of Islam forever.
On the other hand, the Mongols were an aggressive and forceful institution that is loosely related to the Turks from the Altai Mountains in the higher Mongolian plateau. The Mongols were a combination of different nomadic tribes from the region that were moving south, in search of new pasture (McGregor 40). However, the Mongols that invaded the Eurasian Steppes, was an institution that burst suddenly from the traditional Nordic life in the early 13th century under Genghis Khan. This institution was different from their traditional nomad Mongols since it was an organized military force composed of loyal nomad tribes (McGregor 40). They were a combination of tribal folks unlike the Mumluks who were pagans and slaves, but were both highly organized. However, both militaries have their foundation on discipline, and loyalty, with the Mongols possessing the ruthlessness of Genghis Khan (McGregor 40). The Mongols were an institution that is pertinent to the history of the world, since under the leadership and union of Genghis the established a large empire over northern Europe. The Mongols in 1200 spanned Asia, Korea and Mesopotamia, and were advancing to the near east and south when they met the Mamluks (McGregor 7).
The Mongols were unruly, superstitious, intelligent and prejudicial unlike the Mamluks who were organized and who followed a strict Islamic way of life and thought. It is for this reason, that history associates the Mongols with a mixture of heathenism, Christianity, Buddhism, and Islamic, as they adopted the culture and politics of the communities they came into contact. On the other hand, the Mamluks were devoted Muslims whose preoccupation was the spread of Islam. The two institutions’ interaction shaped Eurasian, especially during the Medieval period.
Therefore, the first remarkable difference, was that the Mongols were able to maintain their pastoral and tribal nomadic life despite their constant interaction with the Mumluks (Amitai 2). However, the Mamluks often born to the pagan way of life, converted from a nomadic life to Islam, and became an urban military caste. The Mamluks were mainly composed of slaves born into servitude and who underwent a formal military training (Amitai 2). After completion of this training, the Mamluk would serve in the Sultanate’s military, and go through the manumission initiation to make them non-slave forces. They were bound together by loyalty since their often trained and worked within the same households. This loyalty formed the basis of Mamluk politics, as a service and duty to the Sultanate, and the Kingdom were an attitude and a way of life (Amitai 2). The loyalty and benefits accorded to Mumluks especially during Bahri reign led many boys to be sold into slavery, or they sold themselves into slavery. Moreover, Mumluks were also the result of the constant battled between Egypt and Turkie tribes, which led many Eurasian Steppe families to sell their sons as a means to give them a chance as a better future.
Secondly, the Mamluks were all Muslims while the Mongols were Christians who upon entering the Islamic world converted their religion to a mixture of Shamanistic, Eastern Christian, and Buddhist beliefs (Amitai 2). The differences were also in their leadership and political ideals. Sultans who believed led the Mamluks and held ideologies founded on the premise that they were defenders of Muslims and Islam. This led them to portray themselves and their leadership style from this point of view (Amitai 2). However, the Mongols as led by the Il-Khadin led a predominantly western Christian way of life and thinking at the beginning of their invasions. In their attempts to spread Christianity, they tried to defeat everything that was Islam, by killing the Caliph, destruction of mosques. The Mongols sought to have “alliances with any local and western Christian against the Muslims”(Amitai 2). However, though they converted to Islam almost to the end of the 13th century, the religious dynamics still caused conflicts, which did not disappear with time.
In history, the most decisive battle that shaped the Eurasian Steppe region was between the Mongols and Mamluks in 1260 AD, in which the Mamluks defeated the Mongol army at Ayn Galut, which prevented the advance of Mongols into Egypt (McGregor 15). This led to constant battles and fights between the two lasting over 43 years as the Mongols desperately tried to take over Syria, Persia, Baghdad and eventually Egypt. Even though, the Mongols had military assistance from the Armenians, Georgians, and the European Crusaders, they lost to the Mamluks at the Ayn Galut battle, saving the Mamluk Kingdom in Egypt. The Mongols were trying to advance into the Islamic world, following the 1220 AD mission goals of Genghis Khan, his senior commanders, his son, and later his grandson (McGregor 14).
Analysis of historical records indicates that the Mamluks were able to push off Mongols invasion despite their resources and large numbers, due to an established military tradition among Mamluks. The Mamluk military especially from the Bahri period was marked by strict discipline often retained within the Mamluk kingdom system, where devotion and austerity to duty prevailed as essential attributes (McGregor 15). It is noteworthy that though the Mamluks beat the Mongols in battle at Ayn Galut, the Mongols equally also conquered many battles. For example, during the 43-year period they were in battle, the Mongols were able to overthrow and reduce several submissive regions in the Muslim dynasty. These defeated various communities in Persia, Afghanistan, Asia, and Anatolia, leading to Hulega’s destruction and conquest of Baghdad in 1258 (McGregor 15). Literature indicates that the Mongols were able to conquer these regions, but not the Egyptian Kingdom due to the massive armies, which outnumbered the Mamluks (Amitai 4). Moreover, while fighting in to the north of Egypt, the Mongols did receive massive support from various sources from various Christian auxiliary forces roaming the Eurasian region. In addition, it is believed that the Mongols were able to push back the left wing of the Mumluks since the Mumluks feared the Mongol forces for their reputation as an invincible army. However, the Mumluks prevented the advance of the Mongols south, which was exceptionally strong and disciplined in Egypt. However, despite the many conquests and losses by both, the Mongols and Mamluks were military elite societies that, ruled over the larger Muslim population in the Eurasian Steppe region.
In conclusion, the research of the history of the Eurasian region in the Medieval era indicates it was shaped by the interaction and conflicts between the Mamluks and Mongols. The Mongols and Mumluks were military elites from their respective communities that were diverse yet similar in military loyalty and determination. The Mumluks were predominately slaves and pagans converted to Islam, trained in warfare, and serving under the Sultanate and sometime their masters. However, the Mongols were an organized collection of nomad tribes, under the ruthless and loyal leadership of Genghis Khan, which adopted religion, political, and social ideals of the communities they invaded.
Works Cited
Amitai, Reuven. Mongols and Mamluks: The Mamluk-IlKhanid War, 1260-1281. 1st Paperback. Cambridge, UK: The University of Cambridge Press, 2004. Print.
McGregor, Andrew J. A military History of Modern Egypt: from the Ottoman Conquest to the Ramadan War. Westport, USA: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2006.print
