Talk:Mongol invasions of the Levant

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Merge proposal[edit]

  • Weak oppose. Concerning the idea of merging Mongol raids into Palestine into this article, I am opposed to the idea, since, well, Palestine isn't Syria. There seems to be enough information on the raids, especially about the rumors related to them, that it deserves its own article. That said, I'm open to reasoning on why it might be a good idea. --Elonka 20:34, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
I thought that Syria was sometimes used as a catch-all term for the Levant in medieval historiography, similar to Outremer. Is Syria part of the Levant? Srnec 02:04, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
Hmmm, I'm not an expert on the exact borders of Syria, but can check into it. The Mongol invasions of Syria article is actually new. We'd just had Mongol invasion of Syria (1299), and then I'd moved it to the more general title since it seemed more applicable. As for the definition of Syria, from what I've been reading, the battles in Aleppo and Damascus are indeed sometimes referred to as "Northern Syria" (Syrie du Nord), so you're probably right. But would "Syria" be defined all the way down to Gaza? That's what I'm fuzzy about. Also, I ran across an article in the Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (1987, Reuven Amitai)[1] which is specifically titled "Mongol Raids into Palestine (1260 and 1300)", which is why I think that Palestine is a better title for the particular area that we're talking about. I could really go either way, but if I had to choose, I'd rather keep the "Raids into Palestine" title since I think it's better focused (and the expansion prospects are looking good, once I track down that JRAS article again). But if more editors think that it'd be better to put the info into Mongol invasions of Syria, I could go along with that. --Elonka 03:09, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure that Palestine does not cover Syria, so if it turns out that Syria can describe the whole region, then I support that title. However, if it does not, then we must find another title entirely or keep two distinct articles. I think one article would be ideal if we can find the best title. Srnec 03:12, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
I checked a "historical atlas" today, and it showed Syria at that time extending as far south as Galilee (where the Battle of Ain Jalut took place), just north of Jerusalem. So I'm still in support of having two articles: Mongol invasions of Syria and Mongol raids into Palestine, but I'm also still open to hearing other editors' opinions on the matter. --Elonka 08:39, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Clearly, Syria is not the same thing as Palestine (even if ancient borders are a little bit less clear than today). As far as I know, the only title that could cover both areas is something like "Mongols invasions of the Levant". And of course "Mongol raids on Jerusalem" has nothing to do with "Mongol invasions of Syria", so I think that merge notice is irrelevant. Regards. PHG 07:56, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
But I think that there is one historical term for the region the Mongols raided in and it is Syria. Northern Palestine was then a part of "Syria". Srnec 04:49, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
The Mongols raided as far as Gaza, which was definitely not in Syria. --Elonka 05:20, 7 October 2007 (UTC)
Alright, I concede, issue settled amicably. Srnec 02:33, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

I would like to re-open this. Setting aside questions of whether Palestine is part of Syria, etc etc (really just a question of names), the content in both these articles is almost exactly the same, except that the "Palestine" article is reasonably well written and referenced while this one here is in not-so-good shape. It is not a good idea to have two articles addressing the same history and I propose to take what material and citations exist only in this article and move them to the other. The name doesn't make any difference. MapMaster (talk) 03:59, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

I agree having two separate articles is a bit strange, especially as the Mongol raids usually affected the whole of the Levant at the same time (Syria + Palestine). A nice title could be Mongols invasions of the Levant, as it would cover both geographical areas. PHG (talk) 20:28, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
Because of the POV issues that we were having in the past, I would be reluctant to have a "Mongol invasions of the Levant" article, since it would not really apply. The Mongols moved large numbers of troops into Syria, and were then repelled. They made some minor raids into Palestine, and then voluntarily dispersed. Syria is not Palestine. Perhaps a compromise title would be "Mongols and the Levant"? --Elonka 03:39, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
Hey, that title sounds great to me! MapMaster (talk) 04:39, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
Well, I am afraid it might sound rather POV not to use the word "invasion" just for this area of the world: all other such articles about the Mongols use the format "Invasion of ....." (see Campaingbox attached). The offensive of the Mongols in Syria is usually qualified as an "invasion" ([2]), and so are, often enough, Mongol offensives into Palestine ([3]). The battle of Ayn Jalut (Mongols vs Mamluks) occured in the Jezreel Valley, well into Palestine, and the Mongols occupied areas as far as Gaza, to the extreme south of Palestine. Technically as well, it is not necessary to occupy a territory 100% to define an invasion: the definition of "invasion" is "entering territory controlled by another", not necessarily occupying 100% of it for a long period of time (see German invasion Russia, which did not go much farther than Moscow). Also the Mongol invasion of Europe luckily did not cover the whole of Europe... Cheers PHG (talk) 05:24, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Mongol invasion of Syria in 1246 and 1253[edit]

I added the fact about Mongol raid on Syria in 1246 and 1253. If you really like the history of mongol empire esp. Mamluk-Ilkhanid war, you should know about it. Enerelt 02:33, 10 May 2008 (UTC)


This article is yet another POV fork that has been created as an offshoot of a dispute at Franco-Mongol alliance. The information in it is highly biased, and should be taken with a grain of salt. Please see Talk:Franco-Mongol alliance for more information. --Elonka 19:24, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

I moved this page to Mongol invasions of Syria.--Enerelt (talk) 03:30, 11 April 2009 (UTC)


The article Mongol raids into Palestine was originally a parallel article with Mongol invasions of Syria, however both articles essentially describe exactly the same event - Mongol campaigns into Mamluk-controlled Bilad al-Sham province. Since Mongol invasions of Syria was renamed into Mongol invasions of the Levant, this article now doubtlessly describes the invasion of both Syria and Palestine, which again was the same event. Furthermore, the articles are only about ~25kb each, so they are both small and overlapping. The Mongol invasions of the Levant are a notable significant event, but i don't think we should create Mongol invasions of Transjordan, Mongol invasions of Mount Lebanon, Mongol invasions of Galilee and Mongol invasions of Sinai (not separate campaigns), so we should not have separate Mongol invasions of Syria and Mongol raids into Palestine as well, as long as the main article is Mongol invasions of the Levant.GreyShark (dibra) 06:02, 30 June 2016 (UTC)

  • Comment - invite users from previous discussion on merging "Mongol raids into Palestine" into "Mongol invasion of Syria", pointing out that since the previous proposal the latter article was renamed into "Mongol invasions of the Levant". @Elonka, Srnec, PHG, and MapMaster: GreyShark (dibra) 06:09, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
    • Hi, thanks for the alert, I will take a look. --Elonka 21:53, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
    • Belated thanks for notifying me. As it stand, I would not want to see the Palestine article merged into the Levant one because (a) it's a better article and merging its content will only degrade it and (b) they are both large and stand on their own as is. I am not opposed in principle to the hypothetical articles you cite: they would just need to be supported by sufficient discussion in reliable secondary sources. They should only be created, of course, if the material is too much for the main article. Perhaps it should not have been renamed. Srnec (talk) 12:51, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

The Crusaders[edit]

In the infobox it says that the Crusader forces are in the same belligerent as the Muslims and the Mamluks, but from closer inspection it seems that the they are more allied with the Mongols than the Muslims. While i agree that by the end of it, the Crusaders decided to be "neutral", initial conflicts state otherwise that they were allied with the Mongols from the start. Jacques de Molay of the Knights Templar fought with the Mongols. Hethum I, King of Armenia fought with them at the Siege of Aleppo and Fall of Damascus in 1260. Bohemond VI of Antioch too.

The only event where the Crusaders allied with the Muslims was during the Battle of Ain Jalut, but they never really participated in the fighting. So there's no reason for them to be on the same belligerent as the Muslims, and I suggest that a spearate belligerent box be made for the infobox. Godzilladude123 (talk) 09:36, 21 April 2017 (UTC)