How long could the Mongolian Empire (as a single state) have lasted, and how, and what is the largest it could have become realistically?
IfMongke Khan dies say in 1289 ( his brother Kublai Khan died when he was 79) instead of dying in 1259 during the siege of Hezhou, Mongols can actually conquer most of Eurasia. ...
How do you like such a scenario?
If in OTL the Mongols did not kill off all the settled population it would be strange to expect that from them in any other ATL.e) 5.After Mongols finish with the last unconquered regions in Eurasia ( probably, excluding Scandinavia and some island states),they kill off all the settled population ( this act is strictly recommended in Yassa- settled population is sinful and untrustworthy). All the Eurasia and Soth Africa is populated mainly by nomads.
That was an excellent one!
I agree with you on most points with the exception of the last: If in OTL the Mongols did not kill off all the settled population it would be strange to expect that from them in any other ATL.
There were examples in human history when civilizations were levelled to the ground by nomads and semi-nomads. Like Indo-European invaders (Indo-Arians) did with Indo-Harrapian culture). But it was long ago.
The world has changed.
Most of the nomads (and the Mongols were not an exception to this rule) valued the things made by the settled population. So they needed it.
There was some understanding that "if we kill all of them, then who will we plunder after that?"![]()
That was an excellent one!
I agree with you on most points with the exception of the last: If in OTL the Mongols did not kill off all the settled population it would be strange to expect that from them in any other ATL.
There were examples in human history when civilizations were levelled to the ground by nomads and semi-nomads. Like Indo-European invaders (Indo-Arians) did with Indo-Harrapian culture). But it was long ago.
The world has changed.
Most of the nomads (and the Mongols were not an exception to this rule) valued the things made by the settled population. So they needed it.
There was some understanding that "if we kill all of them, then who will we plunder after that?"![]()
It is like with the hunting - a wise hunter doesn't kill all the animals. He must think about the future.
Well, actually Mongols DID killed most of settled population before Kublai( who started using Chinese “tumans” because he didn’t get reinforcements from Mongolia which was caused by civil war). In North China there was killed 40 million settled population of 45. Central Asia was absolutely depopulated - if reached premongol level of population in XX century! Before Mongols it was the richest and the most developed part of Persia which was the richest and the most developed part of Muslim World. And Persia itself was ruled by nomads for several centuries after that.I actually find tens of millions killed in Pre-Modern times ASB, unless there is a famine or natural disaster and there are more Chinese than Mongols and that might cause their demise earlier than in OTL.
The ancestors of Hakkas actually migrated to the Song Dynasty territory at that time and many Chinese disapeared from the census.Well, actually Mongols DID killed most of settled population before Kublai( who started using Chinese “tumans” because he didn’t get reinforcements from Mongolia which was caused by civil war). In North China there was killed 40 million settled population of 45. Central Asia was absolutely depopulated - if reached premongol level of population in XX century! Before Mongols it was the richest and the most developed part of Persia which was the richest and the most developed part of Muslim World. And Persia itself was ruled by nomads for several centuries after that.
And about goods made by settled population Genghis Khan believed it to be the main reason of conflicts among the nomads. So he considered that all the settled population is sinful and corrupted and so must be destroyed. Yassa is about it.
So what Mongols conquered properly they depopulated. This rule was broken by Kublai but this won’t happen in ATL. And in fact there isn’t much problem in holding territory where all the settled population is destroyed- nomads hold Central Asia till the Russian Empire came.
I'm not stating that Mongols after such a conquest stay as a single centralized state- God forbid! But they can destroy all the states in Eurasia and turn all the continent into one single paradise for nomads.
It is a famous saying - "India was conquered by the British with the hands of the Indians." But we nevertheless call it the British conquest.To conquer the South China whilst the leadership was Mongol the rank and file were Chinese so technically a Mongol army did not conquer south China any more than a Mongol Navy would have conquered Japan.
This rule was broken by Gengiz Khan himself. There is a well known legend that there was a certain Chinese official who managed to persuade Gengiz Khan that it was better to keep at least some Chenese alive in order to exploit them further. (Actually it was not the legend).And about goods made by settled population Genghis Khan believed it to be the main reason of conflicts among the nomads...
So what Mongols conquered properly they depopulated. This rule was broken by Kublai but this won’t happen in ATL.
As for the states I agree (and may add that they could take some parts of Africa as well, Egypt for instance).But they can destroy all the states in Eurasia and turn all the continent into one single paradise for nomads.
This rule was broken by Gengiz Khan himself. There is a well known legend that there was a certain Chinese official who managed to persuade Gengiz Khan that it was better to keep at least some Chenese alive in order to exploit them further. (Actually it was not the legend).
On maximum size, apart from south China, the Mongols conquered any land that Central Asian nomads had conquered before and no other. To conquer the South China whilst the leadership was Mongol the rank and file were Chinese so technically a Mongol army did not conquer south China any more than a Mongol Navy would have conquered Japan.
Since it is almost impossible for the Mongols to conquer Southern China I think it is possible that the indigenous population of Southern China to recover if the Northern Chinese rebel rather than some fleeing South and some cooperating with the mongols.
And they did it while they had a 40-year civil war. So they got almost no reinforcements.Except, you know, they did.
Except, you know, they did.
And they did it while they had a 40-year civil war. So they got almost no reinforcements.
This is to put it nicely, incorrect. The Mongols need large numbers of horses and space to maneouvre them in battle. Take out either that they fall to be just another bunch of scruffy sheep herders. You can't take horse herds through mountains or deserts very easily and you can't maneouvre cavalry very easily in forests, jungle, mountains or paddy fields. Moreover cavalry armies need good grazing, which why Attila the Hun did not hang around in Italy on his raids, but routinely fell back to Hungary.Russian said:As for the states I agree (and may add that they could take some parts of Africa as well, Egypt for instance)
It is unlikely that the Mongols would have deployed much artillery outside sieges for example developing pistols. Their mind set was practically the similar as the various Muslim Turkic warriors, namely real men fight with bow, lance and sword and from horseback. You have to be degenerate city dwellers like the Europeans and to a less extent the Chinese to use whatever weapon you can lay your hands on to do the business.Fabius Cunctator said:In an alternate timeline with limitless pod's, anything's possible. For example, have them advance the use of gunpowder in more battle-decisive ways like powerful guns, for example, versus hand cannons in otl.