The Jewish nation of Khazaria.

As do the Japanese and the Javanese. Mongols are not fatal for Khazars, particularly if they pre-emptively submit to the Mongols. Mongols did not go into mass eradication programs if they found a submissive population. But the state would be heavily weakened (both through Mongol taxation and conscription, and later, during their internecine wars). Can a thinly populated Jewish state survive to the post-Mongol period with its identity intact is a very open question, though.

Very unlikely.

I think while you could easily get the people surviving to a greater or less extent - the Cumans, who did suffer heavily OTL, survived to some extent.

But the idea of "Khazaria" not so much. It has shallow roots, like all previous places in the area.
 

Delvestius

Banned
Despite surviving in the mountains being both more difficult and different than surviving in the plains, which would probably mean a lot of Khazars die trying to adjust - even ignoring the Wrath of the Mongols landing on their heads.

They'd have a better chance there than they did where they were... The mongols could push the Khazars into the Caucasus, who in turn displaces/vassalizes Georgians, and, while most likely becoming Mongol tribute states themselves, would probably be able to preserve their culture from anything the Russians and eventually Ottomans could throw at them.

The Mamelukes beg to differ.

Bro, everyone on the inside, obviously not the frontiers of Conquests... Which to my mind only happen to be the Mamlukes, Germans and Teutonic Knights..
 

Delvestius

Banned
As do the Japanese and the Javanese. Mongols are not fatal for Khazars, particularly if they pre-emptively submit to the Mongols. Mongols did not go into mass eradication programs if they found a submissive population. But the state would be heavily weakened (both through Mongol taxation and conscription, and later, during their internecine wars). Can a thinly populated Jewish state survive to the post-Mongol period with its identity intact is a very open question, though.

The Japanese had mother nature on their side, else they would have been broadsided. Less knowledgeable about Java though, but for some reason I just remember distance being their #1 ally.
 
They'd have a better chance there than they did where they were... The mongols could push the Khazars into the Caucasus, who in turn displaces/vassalizes Georgians, and, while most likely becoming Mongol tribute states themselves, would probably be able to preserve their culture from anything the Russians and eventually Ottomans could throw at them.

How are they going to displace/vassalize the Georgians?

Bro, everyone on the inside, obviously not the frontiers of Conquests... Which to my mind only happen to be the Mamlukes, Germans and Teutonic Knights..

"Bro", the limits of the conquests says something about how much the Mongols could impose.
 
As do the Japanese and the Javanese. Mongols are not fatal for Khazars, particularly if they pre-emptively submit to the Mongols. Mongols did not go into mass eradication programs if they found a submissive population. But the state would be heavily weakened (both through Mongol taxation and conscription, and later, during their internecine wars). Can a thinly populated Jewish state survive to the post-Mongol period with its identity intact is a very open question, though.

Mongols did not go into mass eradication programs if they found a submissive SETTLED population.
Steppe nomads were expected to integrate themselves into the horde, run away, or face mass slaughter for failing to do so
 

Delvestius

Banned
How are they going to displace/vassalize the Georgians?

Since guns weren't invented yet, I recon they'd use swords and spears?

If they could overpower them, bam. Khazars maintain their culture. If not, they end up like OTL.

"Bro", the limits of the conquests says something about how much the Mongols could impose.

Internally, I think it's pretty clear how much dominance they had over everything they had burned through in the thirteenth century, which happened to be all of continental Asia besides most of India and the Levant... There no real argument here other than the Mongols lost at Ain Jalut, which marked the end of Mongol advance in that theater. Doesn't see how it pertains to everything else being a Horde ortribute state.
 
Internally, I think it's pretty clear how much dominance they had over everything they had burned through in the thirteenth century, which happened to be all of continental Asia besides most of India and the Levant... There no real argument here other than the Mongols lost at Ain Jalut, which marked the end of Mongol advance in that theater. Doesn't see how it pertains to everything else being a Horde ortribute state.

They didn't lose in Ain Jalut alone, they simply were denied the possiblity of ever forcing their way through Syria. Terrible logistics, formidable opposition.

Khazaria, however, is nothing like Syria. At all.
 
Since guns weren't invented yet, I recon they'd use swords and spears?

If they could overpower them, bam. Khazars maintain their culture. If not, they end up like OTL.
So a bunch of refugees are going to displace a well rooted kingdom, because Khazaria is cool.

Internally, I think it's pretty clear how much dominance they had over everything they had burned through in the thirteenth century, which happened to be all of continental Asia besides most of India and the Levant... There no real argument here other than the Mongols lost at Ain Jalut, which marked the end of Mongol advance in that theater. Doesn't see how it pertains to everything else being a Horde ortribute state.

It very much pertains to the issue of "Everybody" being a vasasl.
 

Delvestius

Banned
They didn't lose in Ain Jalut alone, they simply were denied the possiblity of ever forcing their way through Syria. Terrible logistics, formidable opposition.

Khazaria, however, is nothing like Syria. At all.

I never said it was, that's a separate discussion.
 
Mongols did not go into mass eradication programs if they found a submissive SETTLED population.
Steppe nomads were expected to integrate themselves into the horde, run away, or face mass slaughter for failing to do so

Various Turkic tribes managed to insinuate themselves into the Mongol horde, so it is doable. The Khazars were a mix of settled and migratory populations. The settled populations would be heavily taxed (and Mongol taxes were no joke), and the migratory population would be expected to contribute men and horses towards the Mongol campaigns, so the results on Khazaria would not be pretty. But their cultural identity would not be under assault. They could survive the Mongols with their identity intact, but as greatly weakened vassals of the Mongols. It is in the latter-Mongol and post Mongol period that the real problem begins. The internecine warfare of the Mongols denuded their allied Turkic populations of their strengths (too many dead, too many slaughters, and too much destruction) and the Russians would be looking to assimilate the country into their own domain. It is here that I see the real problem for the Khazars. Surviving this will take some other external factors.
 

Delvestius

Banned
So a bunch of refugees are going to displace a well rooted kingdom, because Khazaria is cool.

Maybe, maybe not. From what we know, *probably* not. But it didn't happen, so no one can really say, and I like to consider all possibilities and potential butterflies of them instead of pulling a grumpy cat about everything that's challenging.

It very much pertains to the issue of "Everybody" being a vasasl.

Literal pedantry... Never been a fan.
 
Last edited:
You know gents, far before the Mongols even happen, here's a lot of things to consider regarding if the Mongols ever meet the Khazars (POD is during Svyatoslav's lifetime so 960s) and have their combined descendants deal with a resurgent Russia:

1. Does the Liao empire fall at all, or start to decline? Is Muzong murdered on time, earlier, never? Does Jingzong take over on time? How do the Song react? Does it focus north, or south? Does it fight with Korea? How does that fight go?

Liao doesn't fall = no Blue Mongol rise. Liao falls earlier = another tribe rises earlier to replace them. It's fraught with possibilities.

2. There is FIVE generations before the Jin become an Empire. Do the Jurchens manage to produce a powerful state in the period? If so, who is it focused on?

Is there a Jin-Song Alliance of the Sea?

3. In Central Asia at the time, do the Oghuz have good relations with Rus? Bad? Are they seeking to expand West or East?

Do they stay united or do they splinter?

Do the Kypchaks ever organise enough to challenge the Oghuz?

Do they adopt Islam (not guaranteed yet in the 10th c.)?

If they do not (cooperate with Rus to beat up Bulgaria and Khazaria, fall to the Kypchaks, splinter, then adopt Islam) there is no Turcic states in Persia, Mesopotamia or Rum as we know them, therefore it affects everything: Crusades, Rus-Byzantine trade, Rus-Byzantine alliances, Fatimids, Shia-Sunni power balance...everything.

5. Ghanzavids. What happens there?

6. Karakhanids. What happens there?

7. Russian princely wars, what happens there? For all we know, Kiev might get a Polish prince on the throne. Or the other way around.

8. Does the Roman-Byzantine religious schism even happen based on Byzantine involvement in certain politics? Do the Normans even appear on the scene as planned? Is there a papal/imperial conflict? based on that, when do the Norse adopt Christianity? Where are the bishops coming from? Do they centralise? Do they send out mercenaries like before?

....

I mean, come on. This is not chaos theory, this is not "butterflies", this is cause and effect and minimal knowledge of the situation.
 
Last edited:
Maybe, maybe not. From what we know, *probably* not. But it didn't happen, so no one can really say, and I like to consider all possibilities and potential butterflies of them instead of pulling a grumpy cat about everything that's challenging.

If I was a "grumpy cat' about everything that's challenging, I'd never speak a positive word about HRE centralization, to name one thing.

But there's a difference between "challenging but possible" and "unlikely to the point we should take time to consider that it might not be possible".

Literal pedantry... Never been a fan.

Deliberately refusing to be clear in communication: Always been an opponent.
 
Top