Jamukha defeats Temujin

This POD has almost certainly been discussed before, but what are AHers' opinions on what the consequences of Jamukha maintaining his title of Gur Khan (Great Khan) after defeating and killing Temujin?

I know it's unlikely for anyone to have as much success as Temujin would, but what exactly will the ripple effects be on China, Central Asia etc.?
 
Mongol regressed back into warring clan and never get out of stepps(Jamukha is puppet of Keryit khan whom is under chineese rule)
 
Mongol regressed back into warring clan and never get out of stepps(Jamukha is puppet of Keryit khan whom is under chineese rule)
Most likely this.

Genghis Khan succeeded because he was quite the meritocrat, and this tendency pervaded all his rule and conquest.

A Jamukha led mongol people MIGHT do some great conquests, but they wouldn't have nearly the same potential as under Temujin.

As a result, massive butterflies. Technologically and socially, expect major delays.
 
Last edited:
This essentially turns into a "No Mongol Empire" TL, with the standard effects of such a Mothra-sized butterfly. You'd see a stronger Islamic world, and a much stronger and much more populous Persia. On the latter point, Persia only recovered its pre-Mongol population in the twentieth century, so I'd expect it to be about as densely populated as India in this scenario. The Islamic world is probably the centre of science for longer, but at this point it certainly was in a difficult-to-reverse decline. The Sultanate of Rum is a stronger force for longer and never breaks up into several beyliks, though something like a much earlier conquest of Constantinople is out of the question.

In India, the Delhi Sultanate, only recently established, is much weaker without the migration of Turkic peoples fleeing the Mongols into India. Many important Indian figures like Amir Khusrow were descendants of these Turks, so they're all butterflied away. Also, expect Hindustani literature to take a major hit with the absence of Amir Khusrow. I'd also expect the Delhi Sultanate to break up much earlier, and Islam would also make up much smaller minorities throughout India without the Turks settling themselves and going native. It was really thanks to the Mongols that Islam became a significant Indian religion rather than a minor footnote.
 
This essentially turns into a "No Mongol Empire" TL, with the standard effects of such a Mothra-sized butterfly. You'd see a stronger Islamic world, and a much stronger and much more populous Persia.
Going to have to disagree here.
The "Islamic golden age" narrative, doesn't well reflect reality when you consider the major advances philosophically, politically and technologically in the Islamic world, particularly how the mongols brought Chinese medicine, weaponry and civil management to the east which made the Islamic gunpowder empires virtually uncontested until the rise of European colonialism.
It's more of a nationalist narrative than anything, reflecting a loss of utter Arab dominance over Islamic politics (although they were still significant players) and the rise of Turkic groups.

On the latter point, Persia only recovered its pre-Mongol population in the twentieth century, so I'd expect it to be about as densely populated as India in this scenario.
Again, this doesn't really reflect well the mongols per say. The mongol massacre of Urgench has it's population described by a mongol propagandist, with contemporary records mere years later discussing the booming population. It's Timur's rampage which really did larger population centres in.
The Islamic world is probably the centre of science for longer, but at this point it certainly was in a difficult-to-reverse decline.[/quite]Fortunately, the transporting of Chinese and Indian scholars around the Islamic world did stop such a decline and led to major advances for years to come.
 
Going to have to disagree here.
The "Islamic golden age" narrative, doesn't well reflect reality when you consider the major advances philosophically, politically and technologically in the Islamic world, particularly how the mongols brought Chinese medicine, weaponry and civil management to the east which made the Islamic gunpowder empires virtually uncontested until the rise of European colonialism.
It's more of a nationalist narrative than anything, reflecting a loss of utter Arab dominance over Islamic politics (although they were still significant players) and the rise of Turkic groups.

I do disagree with that. I mean, Arab dominance of Islam was coming to an end, that's true, but the siege of Baghdad led to the loss of a lot of knowledge that would have otherwise been distributed across the Islamic world as the Arabs declined.

Again, this doesn't really reflect well the mongols per say. The mongol massacre of Urgench has it's population described by a mongol propagandist, with contemporary records mere years later discussing the booming population. It's Timur's rampage which really did larger population centres in.

It's hard to dispute the enormous casualties of the Mongols in Persia and Russia. It certainly did have adverse effects for the regions at hand. Now, of course Timur worsened the depopulation of Persia, but the Mongols did so before him, that much is certain.

Fortunately, the transporting of Chinese and Indian scholars around the Islamic world did stop such a decline and led to major advances for years to come.

They were distributed around the world?

At least in the case of India, the Mongol conquests pushed Persianate Turks into the subcontinent, strengthening the previously weak position of Islam to allow for it to exist in the long term rather than being the religion of a small minority. Indian scholars became part of the Islamic world indirectly due to the Mongols. They weren't transported around the world on a large scale, save for the "exiling to Mecca" thing that was common in the Mughal Empire.
 
I do disagree with that. I mean, Arab dominance of Islam was coming to an end, that's true, but the siege of Baghdad led to the loss of a lot of knowledge that would have otherwise been distributed across the Islamic world as the Arabs declined.
Yes and no. A lot of the knowledge lost in the siege of Baghdad had already been transported elsewhere, but this is less relevant to a Temujin POD as it was his grandson Hulagu who sieged Baghdad.
It's hard to dispute the enormous casualties of the Mongols in Persia and Russia. It certainly did have adverse effects for the regions at hand. Now, of course Timur worsened the depopulation of Persia, but the Mongols did so before him, that much is certain.
Russia I agree, Persia is quite debatable. But again, Russia is post Temujin.
They were distributed around the world?
Yep. This was standard practice throughout the entire history of the mongol empire. It was majorly accelerated under Kublai Khan though.

At least in the case of India, the Mongol conquests pushed Persianate Turks into the subcontinent, strengthening the previously weak position of Islam to allow for it to exist in the long term rather than being the religion of a small minority. Indian scholars became part of the Islamic world indirectly due to the Mongols. They weren't transported around the world on a large scale, save for the "exiling to Mecca" thing that was common in the Mughal Empire.
I can't speak to the Mughal empire, but yeah we do find a lot of Indian science and philosophy finding its way into the Middle East.
 
Top