You can see an overview of all the daughters in this video here: Overview and Introduction to the Daughters: ruclips.net/video/LMFIb4EhYxQ/видео.html Part One on Borte and Qojin Beki: ruclips.net/video/_WPjeDT4Fg0/видео.html Final part on Altalun, Altun Beki and Alajin Beki: ruclips.net/video/BzqN5wlYh28/видео.htmlsi=39G5jOOwF361BXls
Thank you so much! Finally some guy who goes into detail about Genghis Khan and his daughters! Been searching for these kind of videos for some time now!
Glad it was helpful! I really learned a lot on this series, and realized how many historians today haven't really done more than a cursory look at any of this material.
Buenas Jack, nice video Hey, I have a question regarding Ghazan, why he withdrew shortly after he defeated the Mamluks in the battle of Wadi al-Khaznadar? Do you think Ghazan would have been able to take cities like Jerusalem if he continued his campaign in the land of today's Israel and Palestine? Gracias por tu video :)
There isn't really a good single explanation for why Ghazan withdrew. Depending on the source or the modern historian, reasons range from "reacting to raids in eastern part of Khanate" to "didn't want to try a crossing into Egypt with the approach summer," (certainly a very valid explanation, as if he timed it wrong and the Mamluks prevented his entry, his entire army could be stuck in the Sinai peninsula without water). I think also, Ghazan hadn't realized how precarious the Mamluk situation in Cairo was, and didn't jump on the opportunity. It wasn't from lack of desire, as he campaigned in Syria again in the autumn of 1300 (but to less stellar results).
Some reports however, do say that Mongol troops reached and took over Jerusalem in 1300 after Wadi al-Khaznadar, but the reports are not too consistent and the occupation, if it happened, was very brief.
@@TheJackmeisterMongolHistoryCould you please tell me what these reports are? And if there are links, could you send them to me so I can study them on my own? I would appreciate it very much since I am very curious about them
Unfortunately I don't have access to all of them directly but I can provide names and a quote or two here. Writers from various parts of the Mamluk Sultanate like Kutubi, Baybars al-Mansuri (who was contemporary to the event), Ibn Abi l'Fada'il, the Armenian writer Het'um of Korykus (who participated in the campaign on the Mongol side), and from the Ilkhanate, Ghazan's own vizier Rashid al-Din (who joined Ghazan into Syria) mention that after Wadi al-Khaznadar, Mongol forces raided as far south as Gaza. Some explicitly mention that they entered Jerusalem too.
Kutubi wrote: "Ghazan had sent after the Egyptian and Syrian armies that had been defeated at the battle of Wadi al-Khazandar an officer named Bulay, and with him 10,000 horsemen. They caught up with some of the Muslim [soldiers] and [civilian] refugees. They looted property and [took] booty and prisoners, in such amounts that only God could count it. With his army he fell upon the region of Gaza, the Jordan River Valley and Jerusalem . . . Bulay came [to Damascus], and with him his army, from the Jordan River Valley, Gaza, Ramla and Jerusalem (al-quds). With him was an extremely large number of prisoners." (cited from Reuven Amitai, "Mongol and Mamluks," pg. 244
Iam wondering if u have any interest in doing videos on later khanates 16th century onwards I find the mix of horse archery and gunpowder very interesting khanate of siber or crimea etc ??
I would like to one day. The Dzungars in particular I'd really like to dig into, but it's matter of accessing sources and research on the period. I know the primary sources and modern historians of 13th and 14th century really well. I only know some for the later periods. I'm definitely interested to dig into the period, but it's something I'd have to do quite a bit of background work for to real feel comfortable in writing on it.
As far as I know, it can be translated as "princess" in the case of a woman (Mongolian has no grammatical gender, but please, correct me if I'm wrong). But the word itself has another meanings, all related to being in power, or even being sacred, and it's widely used as a title in the Turkic speaking world, with another spellings.
@morganl3fay195 is right; it basically seems like two titles here (either the same word used differently, or from two different origins entirely). For women it indicates a princess, but when a title for men, at least in 12th/early 13th century Mongolia, it is used for readers who have a sort dual khan/shaman role. So Quduqa Beki was leader of the Oirat, but we also see him doing things like using a weather-stone (jada) to bring rain in battle, things that we would more regularly see a shaman (böge in middle Mongolian) do. Either both, or one, of the titles it probably linked etymologically to Turkic bek/beg/beğ/bey, but the feminine form of that is usually begum. Similar but different; hence the two camps arguing it's a Mongolized version of the word, and others that this at least one is entirely unrelated to the Turkic word. I am not a linguist so I have no opinion on the matter.
Wow….you know so much I love your videos. I wish we can collab sometime.
You can see an overview of all the daughters in this video here:
Overview and Introduction to the Daughters: ruclips.net/video/LMFIb4EhYxQ/видео.html
Part One on Borte and Qojin Beki: ruclips.net/video/_WPjeDT4Fg0/видео.html
Final part on Altalun, Altun Beki and Alajin Beki: ruclips.net/video/BzqN5wlYh28/видео.htmlsi=39G5jOOwF361BXls
Thank you so much! Finally some guy who goes into detail about Genghis Khan and his daughters! Been searching for these kind of videos for some time now!
Big Rakhmet(thanks) for your video, baurym(dear) ! Hallo from Kazakhstan with love!
Thanks for trying to make sense of this jumbled info.
Glad it was helpful! I really learned a lot on this series, and realized how many historians today haven't really done more than a cursory look at any of this material.
Nice! Best one yet!
Buenas Jack, nice video
Hey, I have a question regarding Ghazan, why he withdrew shortly after he defeated the Mamluks in the battle of Wadi al-Khaznadar? Do you think Ghazan would have been able to take cities like Jerusalem if he continued his campaign in the land of today's Israel and Palestine?
Gracias por tu video :)
There isn't really a good single explanation for why Ghazan withdrew. Depending on the source or the modern historian, reasons range from "reacting to raids in eastern part of Khanate" to "didn't want to try a crossing into Egypt with the approach summer," (certainly a very valid explanation, as if he timed it wrong and the Mamluks prevented his entry, his entire army could be stuck in the Sinai peninsula without water). I think also, Ghazan hadn't realized how precarious the Mamluk situation in Cairo was, and didn't jump on the opportunity. It wasn't from lack of desire, as he campaigned in Syria again in the autumn of 1300 (but to less stellar results).
Some reports however, do say that Mongol troops reached and took over Jerusalem in 1300 after Wadi al-Khaznadar, but the reports are not too consistent and the occupation, if it happened, was very brief.
@@TheJackmeisterMongolHistoryCould you please tell me what these reports are? And if there are links, could you send them to me so I can study them on my own? I would appreciate it very much since I am very curious about them
Unfortunately I don't have access to all of them directly but I can provide names and a quote or two here. Writers from various parts of the Mamluk Sultanate like Kutubi, Baybars al-Mansuri (who was contemporary to the event), Ibn Abi l'Fada'il, the Armenian writer Het'um of Korykus (who participated in the campaign on the Mongol side), and from the Ilkhanate, Ghazan's own vizier Rashid al-Din (who joined Ghazan into Syria) mention that after Wadi al-Khaznadar, Mongol forces raided as far south as Gaza. Some explicitly mention that they entered Jerusalem too.
Kutubi wrote: "Ghazan had sent after the Egyptian and Syrian armies that had been defeated at the
battle of Wadi al-Khazandar an officer named Bulay, and with him 10,000
horsemen. They caught up with some of the Muslim [soldiers] and [civilian]
refugees. They looted property and [took] booty and prisoners, in such amounts
that only God could count it. With his army he fell upon the region of Gaza, the
Jordan River Valley and Jerusalem . . . Bulay came
[to Damascus], and with him his army, from the Jordan River Valley, Gaza, Ramla
and Jerusalem (al-quds). With him was an extremely large number of prisoners." (cited from Reuven Amitai, "Mongol and Mamluks," pg. 244
man... what did that guy think was gunna happen talking about genghis daughter like that?
it was a rather poor calculation on his part, that is for certain.
Iam wondering if u have any interest in doing videos on later khanates 16th century onwards I find the mix of horse archery and gunpowder very interesting khanate of siber or crimea etc ??
I would like to one day. The Dzungars in particular I'd really like to dig into, but it's matter of accessing sources and research on the period. I know the primary sources and modern historians of 13th and 14th century really well. I only know some for the later periods. I'm definitely interested to dig into the period, but it's something I'd have to do quite a bit of background work for to real feel comfortable in writing on it.
Why are sometimes men and women called bekhi? Khutugh behki, togtogh behki, alakhai behki, sorhahtani behki..
As far as I know, it can be translated as "princess" in the case of a woman (Mongolian has no grammatical gender, but please, correct me if I'm wrong). But the word itself has another meanings, all related to being in power, or even being sacred, and it's widely used as a title in the Turkic speaking world, with another spellings.
@morganl3fay195 is right; it basically seems like two titles here (either the same word used differently, or from two different origins entirely). For women it indicates a princess, but when a title for men, at least in 12th/early 13th century Mongolia, it is used for readers who have a sort dual khan/shaman role. So Quduqa Beki was leader of the Oirat, but we also see him doing things like using a weather-stone (jada) to bring rain in battle, things that we would more regularly see a shaman (böge in middle Mongolian) do. Either both, or one, of the titles it probably linked etymologically to Turkic bek/beg/beğ/bey, but the feminine form of that is usually begum. Similar but different; hence the two camps arguing it's a Mongolized version of the word, and others that this at least one is entirely unrelated to the Turkic word. I am not a linguist so I have no opinion on the matter.
Thank you both for your answers!
🗿👍