Talk:Mongol invasion of the Khwarazmian Empire/Archive 1

Old comments
Though a bit on the short side for a rather important campaign (in my opinion anyway), I think there are several things that need to be fixed in the artical. For instance, the Siege of Otrar was not a quick capture. It took a five month siege before the Mongols were able to break through a small sally gate to gain access to the city, and it took another month before the city's citadel fell. Further, Bukhara was sieged by Genghis before he assaulted Samarkand, as we wanted to elimante the possibility of reinforcements from Bakhara from attacking his flanks (Bukhara was west of Samarkand). Also, you stated that Genghis selected his third son to be his succesor. However, it should be put in some context. The reason that Genghis had done this was because of a dispute that was rising between the two oldest sons: Jochi and Chaghatai during the siege of Urgench (after the fall of Samarkand). Jochi was promised the city after its fall, and wanted it in pristine condition. Because of that, Jochi interferred with the military aspect of the conquest, infurirating his younger brother Chaghatai. Also, I think it should be noted that the Shah's son, Jalal ad-Din, inflicted the Mongol's only major defeat in the campaign at Parwan in Afghanistan. Another suggestion might be to expand on various different tactics that Genghis and his sons used during the campaign, such as complete and utter decimation of cities and the use of prisoners as body shields when storming citadels. Hope this helps. - Lasserbeamcrossfire
 * I copy-pasted this article from Genghis Khan. Why don't you expand? --Ghirla -трёп- 08:04, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Well, I know that some people can get angry when someone does that. I will expand it then! - Lasserbeamcrossfire
 * Thanks. --Ghirla -трёп- 06:59, 25 April 2006 (UTC)

Alright...
I think I am done with this. There are probably a good amount of spelling errors, so I'll be going back and correcting those from time to time. Think of anything else that needs to be added/expanded/removed? --Laserbeamcrossfire 02:27, 4 May 2006 (UTC)


 * It was a nice article, so I hope you don't mind I expanded on it, and detailed the reasons on the review page. Some of hte issues - such as the Shah's differences with the Caliph, the reasons Jochi was so embittered by his treatment during the war, the incredible use of the tactics of indirect attack and wholesale terror, plus the usual 3 introgatory paragraphs, plus badly needed sourcing and linking.  Hope you like the additions...old windy bear 00:38, 13 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Love the edits myself, so it's not a problem. I don't know much about Mongol military history, but an article I read caused some interest somewhere in my brain, and so I did some additional research. Unfortunately, my library at school was very lacking in modern books on the subject, so I had to use an old copy of Prawdin's book. Anyways, your additions were very awesome. :) --Laserbeamcrossfire 04:54, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

--old windy bear 11:11, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Laserbeamcrossfire Thanks, and you did an outstanding article especially considering the lack of reference material. I have been studying the Mongols for 35 years, and have every book listed in the references, plus 3,000 (mostly varied history on just about everything, especially Rome in all it's phases, the Mongols, and the Dark Ages) more, at home, so my ability to dig up trivia was infinitely greater.  You did a super job on the base article, :) I was just polishing your good work.    Always a pleasure to work with a good person and good editor! :)


 * I've given the article GA status..i picked pt a few typo errors and it would help some additional references but it is a good read up to its level. --Zak 22:57, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Minor cleanup needed
There are still some typos and grammar mistakes in this article - I'll go through and pick them out when I have time, if nobody else gets there first. Katharineamy 22:41, 10 June 2007 (UTC)


 * There's an unclear sentence at the end: "that bitterness, transmitted to his sons, and especially grandsons, Batu and Berke Khan".

Unclear if Batu and Berke are sons or grandsons of Jochi. EverGreg 11:08, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Rename
I remove it as Mongol invasion of Khwarezmia. Because the conquest of Central Asia consisted of the submission of the Uyghus and Qarlughs, and the surrender of Kara-khtan but not only Khorazm itself.--Enerelt (talk) 06:00, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

I seem to have a problem with the photograph on the main page entitled "Ruins of Muhammad's palace in Urgench.", the problem is the description of the photo, when expanded by clicking upon it, says that the photo is not of a "palace" of anyone, merely a fancy resting place for caravans! Which is the correct description. 69.92.23.64 (talk) 21:44, 5 October 2009 (UTC)Ronald L. Hughes Iseem to notice that nothing, as of yet, has been done to correct http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Urgench.jpg ! Either it is the "ruins of Muhammad;s palace in Urgench" or it is a "caravansi?", however the word is spelled? Perhaps one should make some effort to correlate depicitons with the correct descriptions?69.92.23.64 (talk) 21:49, 18 May 2010 (UTC)Ronald L. Hughes

Did the Mongols rule the "Setting Sun?"
It seems to me there is a basic paradigm existing in the second paragraph. It reads thus; "Ironically, it was not originally the intention of the Mongol Empire to invade the Khwarezmid Empire. Indeed, Genghis Khan had originally sent the ruler of the Khwarezmid Empire, Ala ad-Din Muhammad, a message greeting him as his equal: 'you rule the rising sun and I the setting sun'." Just why would a ruler of the Eastern / Oriental world consider that he was the ruler of "the setting sun?" Did I miss something from my geography lessons? Was America discovered at some earlier time that we know nothing of? Just how does our current scholarship explain such words?69.92.23.64 (talk) 21:33, 5 October 2009 (UTC)Ronald L. Hughes

I would also expect some consideration of these words?

"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khwarezm (please look at the "Runestone!", citing the assertation that some "Viking" once traveled there, or resided there, etc.!

You may or may not know that the above group were also known as "Charismians?" And, "charisma" has a particular meaning and well could be attached to many Christian Groups.

http://www.archive.org/stream/encyclopaediaofr00cann/encyclopaediaofr00cann_djvu.txt

"The Fifth Crusade was preached by Iimocent III. in 1215, and the cross was taken b.v Andrew II. of Hungary (1217) and by the Emperor Frederick II. (1220). Frederick II. was excom- municated by Pope Gregory IX. for delaying to take the field, and in con.sequence could not i>revail uiwn the Military Orders to fight under him. But he contrived to obtain the cession of .Jerusalem, Bethlehem, and Nazareth, and in 1229 crowned himself King of Jeru- salem. In 12-14. however, the Templars and Hos- pitallers were defeated by the Charismians. allies of the Sultan of Egypt, and Jerusalem was sacked."

For more sources see; http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1T4ADBR_enUS315US315&q=charismians+iran

And, it seems the name/word "Charis" can be found to mean "Grace!" See; http://www.thinkbabynames.com/meaning/0/Charis

Thus anyone having the aspect of "One with Grace", meaning "Blessing of God", etc., might call themselves as "Charismatics?"

For Christians we might well accept the meaning found here?: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charismatic_Movement

But, what about the "Huns?"

Can you connect the English word "charisma" or "Charismians" with "Khwarezm" or "Khwarezmians?", etc.?

Is there any connection to IndoEuropean?, to Sanskrit, etc.?"69.92.23.64 (talk) 00:12, 19 May 2010 (UTC)Ronald L. Hughes

Debate about numbers is misleading
While it's good to highlight the uncertainty of army sizes for this campaign, there's no point in misleading people with the total improbability of some of these fantastical number claims. A Khwarezm army of 40,000 would mean it's forces had drastically decreased since the Ghurid and Khara-Khitai wars. Furthermore, 40,000 men would not be remotely able to sufficiently protect more than a couple major cities from internal revolt, and it is clear from Juvaini and Rashid al Din that the Shah's garrisons were numerous and strong. The Shah's mobile reserve cavalry force was apparently so strong that Jebe and Jochi's force in the Ferghana Valley retreated without a major battle, and if his reserve is that strong, his total army must be in the several hundreds of thousands.

200,000-450,000 for the Khwarezm Empire adequately shows the range of uncertainty while still being very probable, as with the Rashid al-Din figures for the Mongol forces (75,000-150,000, depending on auxiliaries, given Muqali was still in China at this point). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.247.69.66 (talk) 08:23, 9 September 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (February 2018)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mongol conquest of Khwarezmia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131015081646/http://www.ucalgary.ca/applied_history/tutor/islam/mongols/ilkhanate.html to https://www.ucalgary.ca/applied_history/tutor/islam/mongols/ilkhanate.html
 * Added tag to http://www.timespacemap.com/search/eventsearch.htm?_what=%22Mongolian%20Invasion%20of%20Central%20Asia%22&_maptype=2

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 12:38, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

Army Sizes
There are are extensive citations for all the numbers I added to the infobox in the "Forces" section of the article. They're being reverted for literally no reason.--2600:8801:C500:82F0:C1B9:544B:99AA:1AD5 (talk) 00:54, 10 March 2019 (UTC)


 * Yes I'm surry, feel free to re-add it. --HistoryofIran (talk) 00:55, 10 March 2019 (UTC)

Possible value judgement
I have issue with the following sentence from the article:

”The Mongol wars with the Jurchens however had shown how cruel the Mongols could be“

I feel as though it makes a value judgement on the Mongols, but it presents useful context. Should it be reworded? Pelevinwells (talk) 05:35, 22 December 2019 (UTC)