Бидний тухай
Багш ажилтан
The subject that I would like to discuss relates to the Ismāʿīlī history of the period of the Mongol incursions in 1256. This article deals with three topics: the Mongols and their invasions of Alamut; Mongol-Ismāʿīlī relations before and after the invasions; and issues relating to the death of the Ismāʿīlī leader allegedly at the hands of the Mongols. The Mongol conquest of the Nizārī Ismāʿīlīs’ strongholds has been described as “the single-most disastrous event in their history”, putting an end to the political aspirations and prominence of the Ismāʿīlīs in the region; however, my argument lies in the pragmatic attitudes of the Ismāʿīlīs, who were allies of the Mongols at the beginning of their relationship. This paper also discusses issues relating to the death of Ismāʿīlī Imam Rukn al-Dīn, disputing the commonly accepted view of his murder.
Abstract: Objective: The Mongol maritime issue covers not only South-East Asia but also the Black Sea region and the Byzantium borders that stretched up to the Mediterranean Sea. The Black Sea commerce attracted the Mongols, especially a slave trade that subsequently changed the political balance in the Middle and Near East. Materials: In this paper, I would address this region and the slave trade that involved many political parties of the region. The primary sources and archival documents of various content reveal that the multiparty relations between the Mongols of the Golden Horde, Byzantium and Egypt involved the captives that were taken in the Black Sea region and enslaved in the Mediterranean. Results and novelty of research: Unlike the slaves of the late medieval period, the teenage boys sold to Cairo in the 13th–14th century became military masters who achieved political power in the Near East. This action characterizes not only the dynamism of the region but also a phenomenon that formed a new statehood of the slaves known as the Mamluks. In fact, the replacement of a Mongol nomad element by Qipchaq nomad element in the Middle and Near East was a phenomenon not only for changing the supremacy but also for demographic and economic growth in the region.
Armenian Historian Kirakos Gandzakets‘i was captured by Mongol Noyan Molar during the first wave of Mongol conquest of the Caucasus. He was in captivity for about a year. This gave him a certain understanding of the history and religion of the Mongols as well as some knowledge of Mongolian. On Molar’s orders, Kirakos was taken to serve the Mongols’ secretarial needs, writing, and reading letters. In this paper, I argue that the Armenian source of Kirakos Gandzakets‘i is a first-hand history on the early Mongols in the Caucasus, and the Mongolian vocabulary that Kirakos gives in his work ranks among the earliest Mongolian glossaries in non-Mongol sources.
