Latest / Tamerlane: The Conqueror Who Tried to Rebuild the Mongol Legacy — Fexingo History / The Battle of Ankara: Tamerlane vs Bayezid
Transcript
- Lucas: So, we've talked a lot about Tamerlane's campaigns, his sieges, his strategies, but one battle stands out as the absolute peak of his career — the one that made him the master of the known world for a moment. I'm talking about the Battle of Ankara in 1402, where he faced the Ottoman sultan Bayezid I. Luna: The one with the elephants, right? I remember you mentioned that in passing before. Lucas: Exactly. But this battle was so much more than just elephants. It was a clash of two titans — Tamerlane, the self-proclaimed heir to Genghis Khan, and Bayezid, the sultan who had conquered most of the Balkans and Anatolia. Both called themselves the 'Sword of God' and both were on a collision course. Lucas: Before we dive in, though — I want to say something quick. We've been doing this show for over two hundred episodes now, and I know a lot of you have been with us from the beginning. If you've ever gotten something out of these conversations, if they've sparked a curiosity or given you a new perspective, a couple of dollars a month is genuinely what keeps these going. Buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo — it makes a real difference, and it keeps everything ad-free. Luna: Yeah, it's a tiny thing but it adds up. And it really does keep us going. Lucas: Alright, so let's set the scene. By the late 1390s, Tamerlane had already crushed the Golden Horde, sacked Delhi, and swept through Persia and the Caucasus. But the Ottoman Empire was rising fast, under Bayezid, who had just defeated the Crusaders at Nicopolis in 1396. He was pushing east, absorbing the remnants of the Anatolian beyliks, and it was only a matter of time before their ambitions clashed. Lucas: In 1400, Tamerlane sacked Sivas, a key Ottoman client city, and then he wintered in the region, waiting. Bayezid, furious, marched east with his army. But Tamerlane was a master of strategy — he didn't want a pitched battle on Bayezid's terms. He knew the Ottomans had a strong infantry core, especially the Janissaries, and his own army relied on cavalry and mobility. Luna: So Tamerlane basically led Bayezid on a chase? Lucas: That's exactly it. Tamerlane feigned retreat, drawing Bayezid away from his supply lines and his siege equipment. He also sent out raiding parties to burn crops and poison wells, so Bayezid's army was exhausted, hungry, and thirsty by the time they reached the plain of Çubuk Ovası near Ankara. Lucas: And here's a crucial detail — Tamerlane knew that Bayezid's army included many Turkic contingents who had only recently been incorporated from those Anatolian beyliks. These men had no loyalty to Bayezid, and Tamerlane, as a fellow Turkic ruler, made sure to appeal to them. He even had spies and agents within the Ottoman camp, spreading rumors and promises. Luna: Wait, so he was already fighting a psychological war before the battle even started? Lucas: Absolutely. By the time the two armies lined up on July 28, 1402, Bayezid's forces were already fracturing. The battle began with a massive cavalry charge from the Timurid right, which shattered the Ottoman left. Then, as the day wore on, entire units of Anatolian Turks switched sides, just as Tamerlane had planned. Lucas: The Ottoman center, though, held for a long time — those Janissaries were rock solid. But Tamerlane had another trick up his sleeve. He brought out his war elephants, which he had used in India, and they terrified the Ottoman cavalry. The horses had never seen anything like them. Luna: That must have been chaos. Lucas: It was. The elephants, combined with the desertions and the exhaustion, broke the Ottoman ranks. Bayezid himself was captured, trying to escape with his remaining guards. He was brought before Tamerlane, and here's where the stories diverge. Lucas: Ibn Arabshah, who was hostile to Tamerlane, wrote that Bayezid was treated brutally, kept in a cage and used as a footstool. But other sources, like Sharaf al-Din Ali Yazdi, who wrote the Zafarnama, claim Tamerlane treated him with respect, even allowing him to keep his courtiers. The truth is probably somewhere in between — we know Bayezid died in captivity within a year, possibly by suicide or just from stress. Luna: It's hard to know what to believe with those chroniclers, isn't it? Lucas: That's the challenge of medieval history. But the aftermath is more clear. With Bayezid gone, his sons immediately started fighting for the throne, plunging the Ottomans into a civil war that lasted over a decade. The Ottoman Interregnum, as it's called, meant they were in no position to threaten anyone. Tamerlane could have marched into Europe, but he turned back to Samarkand, leaving the Ottomans to tear themselves apart. Lucas: And that's the irony — by not finishing the job, Tamerlane inadvertently allowed the Ottomans to recover. Within fifty years, they were back and stronger than ever, eventually capturing Constantinople in 1453. Some historians argue that if Tamerlane had pushed further, the Ottoman Empire might have collapsed entirely, and the history of Europe and the Middle East would be completely different. Luna: So the Battle of Ankara kind of saved Constantinople, but only for a while? Lucas: Exactly. It gave the Byzantine Empire a half-century reprieve, but it wasn't enough. In the end, Tamerlane's empire also fell apart after his death — his sons and grandsons fought over it, just like the Ottomans did. But his legacy as a military genius, and the sheer scope of what he achieved at Ankara, is still remembered today. Lucas: There's also a personal angle here. Tamerlane saw himself as the rightful heir to the Mongol legacy, a descendant of Genghis Khan's line through marriage. Bayezid, on the other hand, was a warrior in his own right, but he didn't have that kind of ideological baggage. For Tamerlane, this was more than just a territorial dispute — it was a contest for the soul of the Mongol world. Luna: It's fascinating how personal that made it. Lucas: It was. And you can see it in the way Tamerlane communicated with Bayezid before the battle. He sent letters — some of which survive — where he called himself the 'Sahib-i Qiran', the Lord of the Auspicious Conjunction, and warned Bayezid to submit. When Bayezid refused, Tamerlane didn't just want to win; he wanted to humiliate him. That's why he paraded Bayezid around in a litter after the battle, showing off his prize. Luna: Did he really use a cage, though? Lucas: There's no contemporary evidence for the cage. That story seems to come from later European accounts, probably exaggerated to make Tamerlane look like a monster. Ibn Arabshah mentions Bayezid being brought in chains, but that doesn't mean a cage. It's one of those legends that persist because it's such a vivid image. Lucas: But even without the cage, the psychological impact was the same. The Ottoman army scattered, and Bayezid was taken to Samarkand as a trophy. His son Musa managed to escape, but the empire was in chaos. For the next ten years, his sons — Süleyman, İsa, Mehmed, and Musa — fought each other in a brutal civil war. Luna: So Tamerlane basically created a power vacuum that he then ignored. Lucas: Exactly. He was more interested in consolidating his rule in Persia and preparing for his campaign against China, which he started in 1404 but died on the way. So the Ottomans were left to their own devices. It's one of the great 'what ifs' in history. If Tamerlane had lived another decade, or if he had pushed westward instead of eastward, the Ottoman Empire might never have recovered. Lucas: But we have to remember, Tamerlane was also a builder. He didn't just destroy — he brought scholars, artists, and craftsmen back to Samarkand, turning it into a cultural jewel. The Battle of Ankara, as important as it was, was just one step in his grand vision of recreating the Mongol Empire. Luna: It's crazy to think that one battle could have so many ripple effects. Lucas: That's what I love about history — it's all connected. And the Battle of Ankara is a perfect example. It shaped the fate of the Ottoman Empire, the Byzantine Empire, and even the eventual rise of the Safavids in Persia. Tamerlane might not have achieved his dream of a Mongol revival, but he certainly left his mark on the world.