Many theories about death tolls of Mongol invasions.
I'd invite anyone who has figures of death tolls other than Mongol invasions, too.

Mongol Conquests (Genghis Khan ruled 1206-27. Kublai Khan ruled 1260-94)

John Man, Genghis Khan : Life, Death, and Resurrection

The Jin (North China) recorded 7.6 million households in the early 13th Century. The first Mongol census in 1234 recorded 1.7 million housholds.

Man interprets this as a population decline from 60 million to 10 million.

Man make a rough guess that 1.25M people were killed in Khwarezm in two years-- that's 25% of 5M original inhabitants.
Jack Weatherford, Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World (2004)

From the Washington Post's 4/4/4 review of Weatherford's Genghis Khan...:
"It's estimated that 15 million died in the Mongols' five-year invasion of central Asia."

Weatherford himself doubts most of these high numbers:
"[N]ot merely exaggerated or fanciful -- they were preposterous."
"[T]he numbers have no basis in reality."
Persian chronicles report 1,747,000 k. a Nishapur
1,600,000 killed at Herat in one estimate. An est. by Juzjani gives 2,400,000 k. at Herat.
"Later, more conservative scholars place the number of dead from Genghis Khan's invasion of central Asia at 15 million within five years [which] would require that each Mongol kill more than a hundred people." [Actually, in my opinion, that's a weak refutation. Killing a hundred people in five years is quite doable.]

Colin McEvedy, Atlas of World Population History (1978):

China Proper: In the text, he states that the population declined by 35 million as the Mongols reduced the country to subjugation during the 13th Century.

In the Chart, the population drops from 115M to 85M between 1200 and 1300 CE.

Iran: Charted population declined from 5.0M to 3.5M
Afghanistan: from 2.50M to 1.75M
Russia-in-Europe: 7.5M to 7M

This indicates a total population decline of some 37.75 million.

Alan McFarlane, The Savage Wars of Peace: England, Japan and the Malthusian Trap (2003):
Chinese population reduced to half in 50 years -- over 60 million people dying or failing to be replaced.

Komarova and Korotayev, "A Model of Pre-Industrial Demographic Cycle": Oddly, they skip right over the Mongol invasion ("The Sung cycle was interupted quite artificially by exogenous forces"), but Fig. 13 ends with the population of China at about 102M in 1125, while Fig. 14 begins with 55M in 1250, a decline of over 45M.
Edward Gibbon, Decline & Fall of the Roman Empire, vols.3 & 6
Zingis [Genghis]: conquest of Central Asia: 4,347,000 in 3 cities
Maru: 1,300,000
Herat: 1,600,000
Neisabour [Nishapur]: 1,747,000
Zingis: 160,000 Carizmians [Khwarizmi]
Baghdad: pyramid of 90,000 skulls
Cublai
100,000 Chinese commit mass suicide to escape
100,000 lost in expedition against Japan
PGtH:
1.6M killed in Herat
160,000 of the Shah's troops killed at Bokhara
Britannica 11th ed. (1911) "Jenghiz Khan"
Herat: 1.6M
Battle against Khwarizm: 160,000 Khw. k.

The (London) Independent (18 Aug. 2001):

>3M died during the creation of Genghis's empire.

R.J. Rummel accuses the Mongols of 29,927,000 democides in the 13th through 15th Centuries.

I would love to see Mongolia get annex like Tibet, Manchuria, and Xinjiang.

It will make China look like a vastly bigger nation </pride/prestige/warmonger/empire builder>

duh. I expected more serious replies.

I know that we have a group of people in East Asia to associate with Mongolians as their brothers than with Chinese people. But how much do they know about Mongol's influence and perception on Mongolian people? Nomads are not always reputable terms for the identity.

I dont think CHina will take mongolia even if they can

I just want to use the word "Karma" to describe the story between "Han/mongol/jurchen"(I put manju under jurchen, although some linguists feel they were cousin language)

I'd love to see that Inner Mongolia, Buryatia and Kalmykia get annexed with the Republic of Mongolia, while Tibet and East Turkistan achieved their independence.

Stop talking nonsense and be more serious. You guard your own territory, while the Mongols guard theirs. Period.

No doubt the Mongol invasions took many lives wherever they invaded....but the same can be said of all wars/invasions. As for China's decline, most scholars are starting to consider a major factor traditionally ignored in the past....epidemics like the Black Death was the main reason for the massive decline rather than all out war. Scholars like McNeill, Fairbank, Gottfried, Abu-Lughod, Thomas Craughwell, Gwyn Campbell, have argued this. That of course does not mean the Mongols were saints, in fact they were probably the very people that spread the plague probably picking it up in Yunnan/Burma when they invaded that region.

Inner Mongolia, Tibet, and Xinjiang are Chinese territory so yes, we will guard it quite nicely. Thanks for your concern.

Mongol invasion killed a lot of people. Some historian said mongol invasion caused the world lost 200 million population(well, most happened in mid-asia/east europe as well as China).

They brought european plague?That's impossible.
Mongol invaded Yunnan/Burma at 1250s.At that time,mongol empire had already divided into several small kindoms. Although Kublai Khan was the emporer of whole mongol empire, but he cannot control kingdom like Golden Horde Kingdom.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions

lol, u can discuss this problem with Russia.

Quite the hyperbole if I've heard one.


Considering the plague hit Europe and Asia around 14th-15th centuries, the dates you've provided doesn't exactly help your argument. If anything it makes it even more plausible.

exactly, it is because of Russia china lost mongolia in the first place. No chinese official even dare talking about Mongolia as a part of China although funny enough KMT still consider it part of China. Well they are so called nationalists anyway.

Good. As long as there is no talk about retaking Mongolia by nationalists here, things will go calm.



Whether the casualties recorded in some books authored by the conquered people was exaggerated or not, that's debatable. If we consider the multiplication of populations in the conquered area such as to the south of Great wall, and the Eastern Europe,those figures might not be that insanely high as alleged.

Adding to the fact that the Chinese( actually Khitan origin) Confucius sage Yelu-chuchai being the right hand man of Chinggis Khaan in those days, I doubt he will allow any open massacre of the Han people during his lifetime. Moreover, the interest of Chinggis Khaan to meet the Taoist sage, Changchun, in order to learn from him, Chinggis Khaan took some of his advice with regards to being merciful seriously.

Frankly speaking, we don't know and will never know. Casualties did occur, massacre did occur, however, the actual figure cannot be determined.

DISPICABLE, PRC should annex Mongolia and pour our population into there

Go easy on those wet dream of yours.

China tried to annex Mongolia in the 1920's but The Russians came in Mongolia's defense and kicked the chinese cockroaches out.

Long live Russia and Mongolian independence!

I doubt the casualties figure. I suspected that that the high casualties figure was deliberately spread by Mongol agents themselves to instilled fear to their potential foes, and it work wonderfully.

Mongols failed to invade Western Europe and Japan, and they later became the most powerful nations, coincidence?

They also failed against Vietnam.....what's your explanation for that one?

They did not fully conquer it, but they did lots of damage.

It's because of climatic unsuitability. But they did whack all those dynasties to the north of Vietnam.

Moreover, they were not godly invincible, and for sure possessed weaknesses as well. However, considering the range of an empire carved from Korea to Hungary, that's a kind of the biggest achievement by an insignificant nomadic people.

Now, that's deserve compliment. The policy of freedom to practice any faith instituted by Chinggis Khaan in his Zasakh code of law deserve credits as well. That was the days when Christianity and Islam oppressed "Unbelievers" on the pretext of them being in wrong religions but the Mongols had no such practice, though they were regarded as savage barbarian. The Mongols never perpetrate genocide on a people just because they are of different faiths or races. The absence of this subtlety bewildered many historians up until today.

NOW, that's what I called a difference.

^^Wasn't my point...but whatever.

Like I said, I think the Black Death/Bubonic Plague had alot more to do with major population declines in the Eurasian continent than the Mongol invasions (Many modern day historians attest to this as well, particularly William McNeill). Not that the Mongols were saints or anything but the peak of their power and the spread of one of the worst pandemics in human history coincidentally took place roughly in the same era.

And as most people know, disease kills far more than war ever could hope to. People living in ancient/medieval times were far more likely to die from the microbe rather than the sword and if a major epidemic spreaded, it's lights out for dense populations.

But that's still no excuse for the atrocious damage the Mongols did do in wartime.

As I said, massacre did happen, but not as highly exaggerated as alleged.

Now this is annoying:

Dongbei- 98%
Neimenggu- 80%
Xizang- 50%
Xinjiang- 40%

You advocate assimilation and disappearance of unique cultures of the minorities. That's definitely absence in Mongol's conquest.

Thats because mongol had no population number to assimilate them, look at uighurs and all central asian turks ~ they completely replaced the indo-iranian civilization there.

I don't believe for a second that the Mongols were the saints that you portray them to be. Just because you're a Mongolphile doesn't mean the rest of us have to believe in your bull crap. You had me literally rolling my eyes when I read your posts.

So??? I'm not interested in having those regions break away and a Han majority percentage in those regions will prevent that. You can call it whatever you want, but I'd much rather have it that way than to lose the regions due to foreign pressure/interests.

Did I say they were saints? No one is Mongolphile here and I even defended Han Chinese against racism whenever I see the tone being iterated by anyone in AF.

It is not bull crap to assert that historical records written by the conquered people( or the enemy of Mongols) must be reviewed with critical and objective approach. Since you yourself can't accept it with open mind, that is your problem, not mine, even if you want to roll or pluck out your eyes.



You have the right to believe so, others have the right to believe to the contrary.

Okay fair enough....just our interests vs. yours. That is the history of humanity.

Mortal enemies of the Chinese has always been the Mongols, Manchus, and Japanese.

China should annex Outer mongolia just like they did with Xinjiang, Tibet, Manchuria, and Inner Mongolia.

Doesn't matter if you defend Chinese. Why bring that up? Don't tell me you think I call you out on your BS just because of my ethnicity? What happened to that all humans are family charade? You know you're always talking about how the Mongol Empire appoints individuals positions based on merit and their skills, but the Mongols were hardly the only ones that does that and in fact there were people of different ethnicities placed in to leadership rolls in Chinese dynasties. (whom I'm sure you "racist")

It's tone like this that requires the reciprocation of: I support the Independence of Tibet, East Turkistan and annexation of Inner Mongolia to Republic of Mongolia. A tooth for a tooth.



Don't bring this "Mongol Invasion" issue up and there will be mutual agreement between us, because we will say that your dynasties exercised ruthlessness and cruelty as well. Qin Shi Huang's oppression of the Confucius scholars plus the subjects and his subsequent iron fist ruled was incomparable with the Mongols, yet, you still call them as uncivilized barbarian? Talk about irony.

It's a documented fact that the Mongols appointed people of various ethnicity to political position, a practice that was quite lacking in the dynasties to the south of them. You merely possess certain degree of prejudice against the Mongols that lead you to protest at my revelation of opinion. Let me emphasize again and again, despite those cruelties that people often conveniently cited, the Mongols institutionalize freedom of faith and religion, another unique practice that was absence in other dynasties of that period.

Right then going by this logic, Mongols have no right to complain about how imperialistic China is treating them because throughout history the Steppe Nomads were just as much at war with one another if not more as they were with sedentary civilizations. Genghis Khan's father was poisoned by a rival tribe and lived a horrible life before unifying the steppe tribes, and under his unification goal he ruthlessly crushed his steppe rivals in the same manner he did all other enemies. Even when the Mongol empire was established, they were at constant civil war with one another and this is documented as one of the main reasons for the breakdown of the empire. Kublai had to defend his Yuan Dynasty against his kinsmen and that's just the Mongols.

The Manchus, your so called Northeastern steppe brothers, literally wiped out a huge Mongol tribe called the Zunghars under the Kangxi and eventually the Qianlong emperor.

So before complaining about how ruthless and imperialistic the current PRC is towards your people, just remember we're treating you no different than your own kinsmen has done throughout history.

I believe as long as (part of) China is not under the control of nomadic people chinese have treated them better than their kinsmen, chinese usually lack the interest and capability in dealing with "northern babarians" with force so our ancestors have tried to limit the threat from the north with trade and sometimes politics, while their own kinsmen favor brute force in most cases and often there were endless conflicts among the tribes, during yuan and qing dynasty the ruling class know exactly how to deal with nomadic people and in order to protect their own interest they always use their knowledge and skill to contain or conquer mongols from the north, its fact that mongols have been treated worse during those periods of time compared with other dynasties, of course pride of mongols will never allow them to see things in such a way.

Today China is using the "traditional" way to deal with mongols - with trade, also there are factors of the geographical location, situation of the economy and the fact that today most mongolians in the world have become chinese citizens through past history so its not unlikely that china and mongolia could move closer in the future even if there wont be an reunification.

Since when did I call Mongols barbarians? Can you stop assuming what I think just because of my ethnicity. Coming from a person that calls humanity "family". Thats real irony. And no, many other empires appointed people to various political positions despite their ethnicities. You know even Nazis had Russians in political positions. The point is that you and I have absolutely zero proof as to how the Mongols viewed people different from them. However, I myself find it highly unlikely that they had no racial prejudice whatsoever simply because I think people are incapable of being completely not prejudice. Please respond with more of what you consider "proof" because your attempts at it amuse me.

There's a quick way to end all violences on earth, and that is to vote only females into presidental offices. Women negotiate everything.

I agree with you that women are less violent than men. However, they are also less intelligent than men too. They are only good at cooking.