If the Mongols had conquered Egypt...

and burnt al-Azhar to the ground, how much worse off would Sunni and Muslim scholarship in general be?

Cairo was the one major Arabo-Islamic cultural and intellectual node that was spared the wrath of Khan; if Cairo had been burnt, what effects would it have had on the wider Ummah and Muslim cultural and intellectual output going forward?
 
ummm

I think you fail to see the point and that is if the mongols took over Egypt... no more north Africa. But I belive the mongols were sunni at this time? Or at least the ilkanate was. So this would unity the Muslims which might actually be better in the long run for the islamics. New caliphate anyone? Oh and Spain would probably also be absorbed and the pope might just press the CRUSADE!!!! Button...
 
It's not necessarily the case that a Mongol conquest of Egypt would automatically mean the destruction of Cairo. If the Mamluks surrendered peacefully after, say, a defeat at Ain Jalut then there's quite a good chance that the Mongols will leave Egypt's populations alone. The rich lands of the Yangtze Delta were largely spared Mongol depredations due to their prompt surrender.

That said, I suspect the damage to Islamic scholarship wouldn't have been affected too badly (at least compared with what it had already undergone) if Cairo fell. For one, with Baghdad as an example I suspect most scholars and librarians would have fled Cairo ahead of the Mongol advance, carrying their texts and knowledge along with them.

Tunis is the most likely destination for them, though Granada and the Moroccan cities are also a good possibility. Closer proximity to European ideas might even help introduce new perspectives into Islamic thought.
 
Probably most of North Africa. But that would be BIG because then the mongols (or what ever khanate successes them) have a new way into europe Gibraltar. Then Islam would be unified and that would be bad for anyone in europe.
 
How far into Africa would the Mongols be able to expand?

Given that Mongol conquests are motivated by the search for plunder, I doubt that the Mongols/Ilkhanate would have been able to reach anything further than Egypt. Sudan is just not wealthy or populous enough to extract useful amounts of booty/plunder from, though an invasion of Ethiopia through Hedjaz might be a possibility.

An invasion of North Africa is possible if the Ilkhanate, like the Yuan Dynasty on the other side of Asia, decides to build a massive fleet and invades Tunis (Libya being too dry and poor to sustain much of a horde). It's possible that Europe would just stand by and watch North Africa die, but it's more likely that they will help North Africa for fear they will be next.
 
Given that Mongol conquests are motivated by the search for plunder, I doubt that the Mongols/Ilkhanate would have been able to reach anything further than Egypt. Sudan is just not wealthy or populous enough to extract useful amounts of booty/plunder from, though an invasion of Ethiopia through Hedjaz might be a possibility.

An invasion of North Africa is possible if the Ilkhanate, like the Yuan Dynasty on the other side of Asia, decides to build a massive fleet and invades Tunis (Libya being too dry and poor to sustain much of a horde). It's possible that Europe would just stand by and watch North Africa die, but it's more likely that they will help North Africa for fear they will be next.

The Euros would probably watch the North Africans die, after all the Monogols would have scared the shit out of the European nations, and from their perspective better the North Africans than them. He'll weren't the Byzenties already goin tribute to the Mongols at thi point.
 
If the Mongols bested Egypt there is another thing besides the likelihood that Cairo gets the Baghdad treatment - that Jerusalem, Mecca and Medina could end up plundered as well.

Forget Cairo - what might having the Kabba burnt to ash to to Islam?
 
Wait, its been burned down/destroyed before?

From wikipedia:

The Kaaba has been repaired and reconstructed many times since Muhammad's day. The structure was severely damaged by fire on 3 Rabi I (Sunday, 31 October 683), during the first siege of Mecca in the war between the Umayyads and Abd-Allah ibn al-Zubayr, an early Muslim who ruled Mecca for many years between the death of ʿAli and the consolidation of Umayyad power. Ibn al-Zubayr rebuilt it to include the hatīm.[57] He did so on the basis of a tradition (found in several hadith collections[58]) that the hatīm was a remnant of the foundations of the Abrahamic Kaaba, and that Muhammad himself had wished to rebuild so as to include it.

The Kaaba was bombarded with stones in the second siege of Mecca in 692, in which the Umayyad army was led by al-Hajjaj ibn Yusuf. The fall of the city and the death of Ibn al-Zubayr allowed the Umayyads under ʿAbdu l-Malik ibn Marwan to finally reunite all the Islamic possessions and end the long civil war. In 693 AD, ʿAbdu l-Malik had the remnants of al-Zubayr's Kaaba razed, and rebuilt on the foundations set by the Quraysh.[59] The Kaaba returned to the cube shape it had taken during Muhammad's time.

During the Hajj of 930 AD, the Qarmatians attacked Mecca, defiled the Zamzam Well with the bodies of pilgrims and stole the Black Stone, taking it to the oasis region of Eastern Arabia known as al-Aḥsāʾ, where it remained until the Abbasids ransomed it in 952 AD. The basic shape and structure of the Kaaba have not changed since then.[60]

After heavy rains and flooding in 1629, the walls of the Kaaba collapsed and the Masjid was damaged. The same year, during the reign of Murad IV, the Kaaba was rebuilt with granite stones from Mecca and the Masjid was renovated.[61] The Kaaba's appearance has not changed since then.
 
Those seem fairly minor though - certainly compared to having Mecca reduced to the point the Mongol ponies could ride across the area, the Black Stone and other relics lost to the four winds.
 
Compared to getting the same treatment given to Baghdad or Samarkand? Absolutely.



I have a feeling you doubt the significance of the Qarmations and their attack on Mekkah. To begin with the Qarmations were a very fanatical and unorthodox sect of Shia Islam, perhaps you should read about them. Either ways, this was at the time of a United Khilafah under the guidance of the Amir Al-Mu'minin not the divided states of the 1200s. The deep wound this attack and rebellion had on the Khilafah was tremendous just as all the religious rebellions were during the late Abbasid period.

Also I feel you believe that the Mongols are unbeatable, if the Arabian tribes combined with forces from Yemen, Oman and Egypt converge to defend Mekkah or Madinah before the Mongols get past Tabuk, then they have a tremendous advantage in the desert. Make no mistake, the Mongols were not unstoppable, I could show you primary sources showing that in fact Hulagu was afraid at the strength of the Abbasid defense and worried about his chances of victory, but instead of defending himself Al Musta'sim decided to do nothing but send threatening letters and believed that Allah would bring a calamity down upon Hulagu rather than giving a earnest defense, interestingly the very next regional power the Mongols faced (in the Middle East) was a decisive defeat.
 
Last edited:
I have a feeling you doubt the significance of the Qarmations and their attack on Mekkah. To begin with the Qarmations were a very fanatical and unorthodox sexy of Shia Islam, perhaps you should read about them. Either ways, this was at the time of a United Khilafah under the guidance of the Amir Al-Mu'minin not the divided states of the 1200s. The deep wound this attack and rebellion had on the Khilafah was tremendous just as all the religious rebellions were during the late Abbasid period.

Also I feel you believe that the Mongols are unbeatable, if the Arabian tribes combined with forces from Yemen, Oman and Egypt converge to defend Mekkah or Madinah before the Mongols get past Tabuk, then they have a tremendous advantage in the desert. Make no mistake, the Mongols were not unstoppable, I could show you primary sources showing that in fact Hulagu was afraid at the strength of the Abbasid defense and worried about his chances of victory, but instead of defending himself Al Musta'sim decided to do nothing but send threatening leaders and believed that Allah would bring a calamity down upon Hulagu rather than giving a earnest defense, interestingly the very next regional power the Mongols faced (in the Middle East) was a decisive defeat.

I'll try and read up on it - admittedly, "pelted by stones" sounds fairly minor from an architectural standpoint, certainly compared to being razed to the ground and turned to ash, but context is everything I suppose.

I also don't think the Mongols were invincible (Ain Jalut and Vietnam certainly proved that) but given we're wondering what would have happened if Egypt and the Levant fell to the Mongols, its worth wondering how it would have effected the region and the various religions that consider it sacred.
 
Top