“I will cast you down from the firmament, From the bottom up I will throw you up like a lion
I won't leave anyone alive in your kingdom
I will betray your cities, regions and lands to the fire."
(Fazlullah Rashid-ad-Din. Jami-at-Tavarikh. Baku: "Nagyl Evi", 2011. p.45)
The recent publication on Voennoye Obozreniye of the material “Why did they create a fake about the“Mongol”invasion of Russia” caused abundant, otherwise you cannot say, controversy. And some liked it, others did not. Which is natural. But in this case we will not talk about the content side of this material, but about … "formal", that is, the accepted rules for writing this kind of materials. In publications on a historical theme, especially if the author's material claims to be something new, it is customary to start with the historiography of the issue. At least briefly, because “we all stand on the shoulders of giants,” or rather those who were before us. Second, any a priori statements are usually proven by citing credible sources. As well as the statements of the adepts of the material that the Mongols left no trace in military history. And since the VO site focuses specifically on it, it makes sense to tell about it in more detail, based not on mythical revelations, but on the data of modern historical science.
Clash of mounted Mongol detachments. Illustration from the manuscript "Jami 'at-tavarih", XIV century. (State Library, Berlin)
To begin with, there is hardly any other people about which so much has been written, but in fact very little is known. Indeed, although the texts of Plano Carpini, Guillaume de Rubrucai and Marco Polo [1] were repeatedly quoted (in particular, the first translation of Carpini's work into Russian was published back in 1911), we, in general, do not have increased.
Negotiation. Illustration from the manuscript "Jami 'at-tavarih", XIV century. (State Library, Berlin)
But we have something to compare their descriptions with, since in the East his "history of the Mongols" was written by Rashid ad-Din Fazlullah ibn Abu-l-Khair Ali Hamadani (Rashid ad-Doula; Rashid at-Tabib - "doctor Rashid") (c. 1247 - July 18, 1318,) - a famous Persian statesman, doctor and scientist-encyclopedist; former minister in the state of the Hulaguids (1298 - 1317). He was the author of a historical work written in Persian called "Jami 'at-tavarih" or "Collection of Chronicles", which is a valuable historical source on the history of the Mongol Empire and Iran of the Hulaguid era [2].
Siege of Alamut 1256. Miniature from the manuscript "Tarikh-i Jahangushai". (National Library of France, Paris)
Another important source on this topic is the historical work "Ta'rikh-i jahangushay" ("History of the World Conqueror") by Ala ad-din Ata Malik ibn Muhammad Juweini (1226 - March 6, 1283), another Persian statesman and historian of the same the era of the Hulaguids. His composition consists of three main parts:
First: the history of the Mongols, as well as descriptions of their conquests before the events that followed the death of Khan Guyuk, including the story of the descendants of the Khan Juchi and Chagatai;
Second: the history of the Khorezmshah dynasty, and here is also given the history of the Mongol governors of Khorasan up to 1258;
Third: it continues the history of the Mongols before their victory over the Assassins; and tells about this sect itself [3].
The Mongol conquest of Baghdad in 1258. Illustration from the manuscript "Jami 'at-tavarih", XIV century. (State Library, Berlin)
There are archaeological sources, but they are not very rich. But today they are already quite enough to draw evidence-based conclusions, and the texts about the Mongols, as it turned out, exist not only in European languages, but also in Chinese. The Chinese sources referred to in this case are dynastic histories, government statistics and government annals. And so they describe in detail and over the years, with the thoroughness characteristic of the Chinese, both wars and campaigns, and the amount of tribute paid to the Mongols in the form of rice, beans and cattle, and even tactical methods of waging war. Chinese travelers who went to the Mongol rulers also left their notes about the Mongols and North China in the first half of the 13th century. "Men-da bei-lu" ("Full description of the Mongol-Tatars") is practically the most ancient source written in Chinese on the history of Mongolia. This "Description" contains the story of the South Sung ambassador Zhao Hong, who visited Yanjing in 1221 with the commander-in-chief of the Mongol troops in North China, Mukhali. "Men-da bei-lu" was translated into Russian by VP Vasiliev back in 1859, and for that time this work was of great scientific interest. However, today it is already outdated and a new, better translation is needed.
Civil strife. Illustration from the manuscript "Jami 'at-tavarih", XIV century. (State Library, Berlin)
There is also such a valuable historical source as "Chang-chun zhen-ren si-yu ji" ("Note on the journey to the West of the righteous Chang-chun") - dedicated to the travels of a Taoist monk in Central Asia during the western campaign of Genghis Khan (1219-1225 biennium). The complete translation of this work was carried out by P. I. Kafarov in 1866 and this is the only complete translation of this work for today, which has not lost its significance today. There is "Hei-da shi-lue" ("Brief information about the black Tatars") - an even more important source (and the richest!) Of information about the Mongols in comparison with "Meng-da bei-lu" and "Chang-chun zhen ren si-yu ji ". It represents the notes of two Chinese travelers at once - Peng Da-ya and Xu Ting, who visited Mongolia at the court of Ogedei as part of South Sun diplomatic missions, and brought together. However, in Russian we have only half of these notes.
The enthronement of the Mongol Khan. Illustration from the manuscript "Jami 'at-tavarih", XIV century. (State Library, Berlin)
Finally, there is a proper Mongolian source, and a monument of the proper Mongolian national culture of the 13th century. "Mongol-un niucha tobchan" ("The Secret History of the Mongols"), the discovery of which is directly related to Chinese historiography. It tells about the ancestors of Genghis Khan and how he fought for power in Mongolia. Initially, it was written using the Uyghur alphabet, which the Mongols borrowed at the beginning of the 13th century, but it has come down to us in a transcription made in Chinese characters and (fortunately for us!) With an accurate interlinear translation of all Mongolian words and a short commentary on each of the paragraphs written in Chinese.
Mongols. Rice. Angus McBride.
In addition to these materials, there is a significant amount of information contained in the Chinese documents of the era of Mongol rule in China. For example, "Tung-chzhi tiao-ge" and "Yuan dian-zhang", which contain decrees, administrative and judicial decisions on a variety of issues, starting with instructions on how to slaughter a sheep according to the Mongolian custom, and ending with decrees of the ruling in China Mongol emperors, and descriptions of the social status of the various classes of the then Chinese society. It is clear that, as primary sources, these documents are of great value for historians studying the time of Mongol rule in China. In a word, there is an extensive layer of sources in the field of sinology, which are directly related to the history of medieval Mongolia. But it is clear that all this must be studied, as, in fact, any branch of the history of the past. The “came, saw, conquered” type of “cavalry attack on history” with references to only one Gumilyov and Fomenko and K (as we often see in accompanying comments) is completely inappropriate in this case.
Mongol drives prisoners. Rice. Angus McBride.
However, it should be emphasized that, when starting to study this topic, it is much easier to deal with secondary sources, including those that are based not only on the study of primary written sources of European and Chinese authors, but also on the results of archaeological excavations carried out in their time by Soviet and Russian scientists. Well, for the general development in the field of the history of your homeland, we can recommend the 18 volumes of the series "Archeology of the USSR" published in the open access by the Institute of Archeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, published over the period from 1981 to 2003. And, of course, for us the main source of information is PSRL - The Complete Collection of Russian Chronicles. Note that today there is no real evidence of their falsification either in the era of Mikhail Romanov, or Peter I, or Catherine II. All this is nothing more than the inventions of amateurs from "folk history", not worth a damn. The most interesting thing is that everyone heard about the chronicle stories (the latter, by the way, not one, but many!), But for some reason very few people read them. But in vain!
Mongol with bow. Rice. Wayne Reynolds.
As for the actual weapons research topic, an important place is occupied by the research of a number of Russian historians recognized both in Russia and abroad [4]. There are entire schools created by well-known historians in individual universities of our country and have prepared a number of interesting and significant publications on this topic [5].
A very interesting work “Arms and Armor. Siberian weapons: from the Stone Age to the Middle Ages”, published in 2003, wrote by A. I. Sokolov, at the time of its publication, candidate of historical sciences, senior researcher at the Institute of Archeology and Ethnography of the Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, who has been engaged in archaeological research in Altai and in the steppes of the Minusinsk Basin for more than 20 years [6].
One of the books by Stephen Turnbull.
The Mongols also paid their attention to the topic of military affairs among the English-speaking historians published in the Osprey publishing house, and in particular, such a well-known specialist as Stephen Turnbull [7]. Acquaintance with English-language literature in this case is doubly beneficial: it makes it possible to get acquainted with the material and improve in English, not to mention the fact that the illustrative side of the Osprey editions is distinguished by a high level of reliability.
Heavily armed Mongol warriors. Rice. Wayne Reynolds.
Having become acquainted, even if very briefly, with the historiographic basis of the theme of Mongolian [8] military art, one can consider it already and in general, leaving references to each specific fact for purely scientific works in this area.
To begin, however, the story of Mongolian weapons should not be with weapons, but … with a horse harness. It was the Mongols who guessed to replace the bit with cheekpieces with a bit with large outer rings - snaffles. They were at the ends of the bit, and the headband straps were already attached to them and the reins were tied. So, the bit and bridle acquired a modern look and remain so today.
Mongolian bits, bit rings, stirrups and horseshoes.
They also improved the saddles. Now saddle bows were made in such a way as to get a wider base. And this, in turn, made it possible to reduce the pressure of the rider on the back of the animal and increase the maneuverability of the Mongolian cavalry.
As for throwing weapons, that is, bows and arrows, then, as noted by all sources, the Mongols were masterful. However, the very design of their bows was close to ideal. They used bows with a frontal corneous pad and "paddle-like" extremities. According to archaeologists, the distribution of these bows in the Middle Ages was associated with the Mongols, therefore they are often even called "Mongolian". The frontal pad made it possible to increase the resistance of the central part of the bow to a break, but in general, its flexibility did not decrease. The bow kibit (reaching 150-160 cm) was assembled from several types of wood, and from the inside it was reinforced with plates of the horns of artiodactyls - a goat, a tur, a bull. Tendons from the back of a deer, elk or bull were glued to the wooden base of the bow from the outside, which increased its flexibility. For the Buryat craftsmen, whose bows are most similar to the ancient Mongols, this process took up to a week, since the thickness of the tendon layer had to reach one and a half centimeters, and each layer was glued only after the previous one was completely dry. The finished onion was pasted over with birch bark, pulled into a ring and dried … for at least a year. And just one such bow took at least two years, so that at the same time, probably, a lot of bows were put into stock at once.
Despite this, bows often broke. Therefore, the Mongol warriors took with them, according to Plano Carpini, two or three bows. They probably also had spare bowstrings that were needed in different climatic conditions. For example, it is known that a bowstring made of twisted mutton intestines serves well in summer, but does not tolerate autumn slush. So for successful shooting at any time of the year and weather, a different bowstring was needed.
Finds and their reconstructions from the museum of the Zolotarevskoye settlement near Penza.
They drew the bow in a way that was, however, known long before the Mongols appeared in the historical arena. It was called “a method with a ring:“When going to draw a bow, take it … in the left hand, put the bowstring behind the agate ring on the thumb of the right hand, the front joint of which is bent forward, keep it in this position with the help of the middle joint of the index finger, pressed against him, and pull the bowstring until the left hand reaches out and the right one approaches the ear; having outlined their goal, they take away the index finger from the thumb, at the same moment the bowstring slides off the agate ring and throws an arrow with considerable force (Uk. Soch. AI Soloviev - p. 160).
Jade Archer's Ring. (Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York)
Almost all written sources that have come down to us note the skill with which the Mongol warriors used the bow. “It is very dangerous to start a battle with them, because even in small skirmishes with them there are so many killed and wounded, as others have in big battles. This is a consequence of their dexterity in archery, as their arrows pierce almost all types of protective equipment and armor,”the Armenian prince Gaiton wrote in 1307. The reason for such a successful shooting was associated with the high striking qualities of the Mongolian arrowheads, which were large and distinguished by great sharpness. Plano Carpini wrote about them as follows: "Iron arrowheads are very sharp and cut on both sides like a double-edged sword", and those of them that were used "… for shooting birds, animals and unarmed people, three fingers wide."
Arrowheads found at the Zolotarevskoye settlement near Penza.
The tips were flat in cross-section, petiolate. There are asymmetric rhombic tips, but there are also known ones in which the striking part had a straight, obtuse-angled or even semicircular shape. These are the so-called cuttings. Two-horned ones are less common, they were used for shooting at horses and an enemy not protected by armor.
Arrowheads from Tibet, 17th - 19th centuries (Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York)
Interestingly, many large-format tips had a zigzag or "lightning-like" section, that is, one half of the tip protruded slightly above the other, that is, it resembled a zigzag of lightning in the section. It has been suggested that such tips could rotate in flight. But whether this is actually so, no one has ever checked.
It is believed that it was customary to shoot with arrows with such massive cuts. This made it possible to hit the warriors without armor, standing in the back rows of dense structures, as well as seriously injure the horses. As for the warriors in armor, they usually used massive three-, four-sided or completely round, subulate, armor-piercing tips against them.
Small rhombic arrowheads, which were popular among the Turks in the past, were also encountered and can be seen among the finds of archaeologists. But three-bladed and four-bladed tips with wide blades and holes punched in them in the Mongolian time practically ceased to occur, although before that they were very popular. In addition to the arrowheads, there were bone "whistles" in the form of a double cone. a pair of holes were made in them and in flight they emitted a piercing whistle.
Pursuit of the fleeing. Illustration from the manuscript "Jami 'at-tavarih", XIV century. (State Library, Berlin)
Plano Carpini reported that each Mongol archer carried "three large quivers full of arrows." The material for the quivers was birch bark and they contained about 30 arrows each. Arrows in quivers were covered with a special cover - tokhtuy - to protect them from the weather. Arrows in quivers could fit with their tips up and down, and even in different directions. It was customary to decorate quivers with horn and bone onlays with geometric patterns and images of various animals and plants.
Quiver and bow. Tibet or Mongolia, XV - XVII centuries (Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York)
In addition to such quivers, arrows could also be stored in flat leather cases, similar in shape to bow cases with one straight side and the other curly. They are well known from Chinese, Persian and Japanese miniatures, as well as from the exposition in the Armory Chamber of the Moscow Kremlin, and among ethnographic material from the regions of Transbaikalia, South and Eastern Siberia, the Far East and the West Siberian forest-steppe. Arrows in such quivers were always laid with their plumage upward, so that they protruded outward for more than half of their length. They were worn on the right side so that they did not interfere with riding.
Chinese quiver of the 17th century. (Metrolithin Museum, New York)
Bibliographic list
1. Plano Carpini J. Del. History of the Mongals // J. Del Plano Carpini. History of the Mongals / G. de Rubruk. Journey to the Eastern Countries / Book of Marco Polo. - M.: Thought, 1997.
2. Rashid ad-Din. Collection of chronicles / Per. from Persian L. A. Khetagurov, edition and notes by prof. A. A. Semenova. - M., L.: Publishing house of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR, 1952. - T. 1, 2, 3; Fazlullah Rashid ad-Din. Jami-at-Tavarikh. - Baku: "Nagyl Evi", 2011.
3. Ata-Melik Juvaini. Genghis Khan. Genghis Khan: the history of the world conqueror / Translated from Mirza Muhammad Qazvini's text into English by J. E. Boyle, with a foreword and bibliography by D. O. Morgan. Translation of the text from English into Russian by E. E. Kharitonova. - M.: "Publishing House MAGISTR-PRESS", 2004.
4. Gorelik MV Early Mongolian armor (IX - first half of the XVI centuries) // Archeology, ethnography and anthropology of Mongolia. - Novosibirsk: Nauka, 1987.-- S. 163-208; Gorelik M. V. Armies of the Mongol-Tatars of the X-XIV centuries: Military art, weapons, equipment. - M.: Vostochny horizon, 2002; Gorelik M. V. Steppe battle (from the history of military affairs of the Tatar-Mongols) // Military affairs of the ancient and medieval population of North and Central Asia. - Novosibirsk: IIFF SO AN SSSR, 1990. - S. 155-160.
5. Khudyakov Yu. S. Armament of medieval nomads of Southern Siberia and Central Asia. - Novosibirsk: Science, 1986; Khudyakov Yu. S. Armament of the nomads of Southern Siberia and Central Asia in the era of the developed Middle Ages. - Novosibirsk: IAET, 1997.
6. Sokolov A. I. “Arms and Armor. Siberian weapons: from the Stone Age to the Middle Ages”. - Novosibirsk: "INFOLIO-press", 2003.
7. Stephen Turnbull. Genghis Khan & the Mongol Conquests 1190-1400 (ESSENTIAL HISTORIES 57), Osprey, 2003; Stephen Turnbull. Mongol Warrior 1200-1350 (WARRIOR 84), Osprey, 2003; Stephen Turnbull. The Mongol Invasions of Japan 1274 and 1281 (CAMPAIGN 217), Osprey, 2010; Stephen Turnbull. The Great Wall of China 221 BC – AD 1644 (FORTRESS 57), Osprey, 2007.
8. It is clear that the Mongolian army was never multinational, but was a motley mixture of Mongol-speaking and later Turkic-speaking nomadic tribes. Therefore, the very concept of "Mongolian" in this case carries a more collective than ethnic content.
