Greetings!
I was reviewing some documentaries about Ghengis Khan and the Mongol Empire recently.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4024[/ATTACH]
This quote must be the inspiration for the famous quotation from Conan! In reviewing various historical documentaries, and reading through the ancient histories, it amazes me that after the Mongol conquest of the Jin Empire, there were huge caravans taking booty, treasures, and slaves back to Korakoum in Mongolia for *months*. When the Mongols conquered the huge city of Beijing, they slaughtered hundreds of thousands of people, and enslaved more. The Jin Empire had an army of over 300,000 soldiers, and they were annihilated by the Mongols.
The Empire of Western Xia, it too was crushed by the Mongols. The Empire of Western Xia had a large army, many fortified cities, and vast wealth. It was utterly annihilated, and wiped off the earth.
The Kingdom of Dali, to the west of the Song Empire, it too, was crushed by the Mongol armies.
Then, of course, the Song Empire. That was an absolute bloodbath, and the conquest of the world's greatest and most advanced empire in the world. Millions of people killed, and millions of people enslaved. I read an intersting note, that when various Han Chinese troops defected and joined the Mongols--several hundred thousand troops--the Mongols gave them all land, treasure, and Korean women as wives, from the Mongols earlier conquest of Korea. Evidently the Han Chinese troops, as well as several Chinese generals, were retained as generals serving the Mongols, and enrolled under the Mongol banners. They were accepted, paid well, and provided with land, treasure and booty to serve their Mongol overlords!
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4025[/ATTACH]
This quote from Ghengis Khan reflects his conviction that Tengri, the Lord of the Blue Sky, had given him a divine purpose, a divine mission in life.
The Mongols of course, didn't just wipe out and annihilate several of the world's greatest empires and kingdoms in China. They also crushed the Kwarazham Muslim Empire, and conquered all of Persia, Iraq, and much of Syria and Turkey as well. The annihilation of the Muslim Caliph and the great city of Bahgdad sent shockwaves throughout the Muslim world, and decisively ended the "Muslim Golden Age."
The Mongols then conquered Russia and large parts of Europe, annihilating the best armies of Christendom in a matter of a few weeks. Poland, Hungary, Teutonic knights, Russian knights and great princes--all were slaughtered by the Mongols with seemingly laughable ease.
The Chinese, the Muslims, the Christians--they were all so smug and *proud*.
All were forced to their knees, groveling before their new Mongolian masters.
After the absolute annihilation of the Muslim city of Bahgdad, the Mongol armies rode swiftly into Syria and the Levant. Word reached the cities of Aleppo and Demascus that the Mongols were coming for them. Those cities opened their gates, and got on their knees without a sword being drawn.
Yeah, the great cities that the Christians had been fighting against for *decaded*, praying to conquer a city like Demascus--they never were able to do so, in decades. And yet, the Mongols captured them with ease. The Turks? Yeah, the Turks that were famous for giving the Christians and Byzantines all kinds of problems, *for years*--they were slaughtered by the Mongols in a few weeks, their great nobles and leaders crushed on their knees.
The mighty Christian knights that had been fighting the Muslims for years so well? They were crushed with pitiful ease in Poland and Hungary. In the aftermath, the Mongols slaughtered 50% or more of the entire population of Hungary, and left it a wasteland. The Mongols then reached the Adriatic Sea, and swept into Croatia, and then onto Bulgaria, and adding it to the vassal states bowing down to the Mongol Dominion.
The best generals. The greatest Kings and Emperors. The smartest and most powerful peoples in the world. All of them were feeble, and powerless against the rough barbarian Mongols from the steppes!
Amazing stuff!
[video=youtube;D4CIh_Lx8SY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4CIh_Lx8SY[/youtube]
Here is some awesome Mongolian music--"Throat Singing" from the film, "Mongol." Excellent film by the way as well!
[video=youtube;3rPtuCvbUtw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rPtuCvbUtw[/youtube]
Very interesting drawings of Mongol warriors, set as background to excellent Mongolian music!
The rise of the Mongolian Empire is astonishing, and mind-boggling how in 25 years, Ghengis Khan conquered more land and peoples than the Roman Empire accomplished in 400 years.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Dan Carlin does a great podcast series on the Wrath of the Khans.
For me the brilliance of the Mongols was not just their military strength but also their diplomatic strategies to both divide and conquor and to absorb other cultures armies into their own.
Quote from: SHARK;1116233Greetings!
I was reviewing some documentaries about Ghengis Khan and the Mongol Empire recently.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4024[/ATTACH]
This quote must be the inspiration for the famous quotation from Conan! In reviewing various historical documentaries, and reading through the ancient histories, it amazes me that after the Mongol conquest of the Jin Empire, there were huge caravans taking booty, treasures, and slaves back to Korakoum in Mongolia for *months*. When the Mongols conquered the huge city of Beijing, they slaughtered hundreds of thousands of people, and enslaved more. The Jin Empire had an army of over 300,000 soldiers, and they were annihilated by the Mongols.
The Empire of Western Xia, it too was crushed by the Mongols. The Empire of Western Xia had a large army, many fortified cities, and vast wealth. It was utterly annihilated, and wiped off the earth.
The Kingdom of Dali, to the west of the Song Empire, it too, was crushed by the Mongol armies.
Then, of course, the Song Empire. That was an absolute bloodbath, and the conquest of the world's greatest and most advanced empire in the world. Millions of people killed, and millions of people enslaved. I read an intersting note, that when various Han Chinese troops defected and joined the Mongols--several hundred thousand troops--the Mongols gave them all land, treasure, and Korean women as wives, from the Mongols earlier conquest of Korea. Evidently the Han Chinese troops, as well as several Chinese generals, were retained as generals serving the Mongols, and enrolled under the Mongol banners. They were accepted, paid well, and provided with land, treasure and booty to serve their Mongol overlords!
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4025[/ATTACH]
This quote from Ghengis Khan reflects his conviction that Tengri, the Lord of the Blue Sky, had given him a divine purpose, a divine mission in life.
The Mongols of course, didn't just wipe out and annihilate several of the world's greatest empires and kingdoms in China. They also crushed the Kwarazham Muslim Empire, and conquered all of Persia, Iraq, and much of Syria and Turkey as well. The annihilation of the Muslim Caliph and the great city of Bahgdad sent shockwaves throughout the Muslim world, and decisively ended the "Muslim Golden Age."
The Mongols then conquered Russia and large parts of Europe, annihilating the best armies of Christendom in a matter of a few weeks. Poland, Hungary, Teutonic knights, Russian knights and great princes--all were slaughtered by the Mongols with seemingly laughable ease.
The Chinese, the Muslims, the Christians--they were all so smug and *proud*.
All were forced to their knees, groveling before their new Mongolian masters.
After the absolute annihilation of the Muslim city of Bahgdad, the Mongol armies rode swiftly into Syria and the Levant. Word reached the cities of Aleppo and Demascus that the Mongols were coming for them. Those cities opened their gates, and got on their knees without a sword being drawn.
Yeah, the great cities that the Christians had been fighting against for *decaded*, praying to conquer a city like Demascus--they never were able to do so, in decades. And yet, the Mongols captured them with ease. The Turks? Yeah, the Turks that were famous for giving the Christians and Byzantines all kinds of problems, *for years*--they were slaughtered by the Mongols in a few weeks, their great nobles and leaders crushed on their knees.
The mighty Christian knights that had been fighting the Muslims for years so well? They were crushed with pitiful ease in Poland and Hungary. In the aftermath, the Mongols slaughtered 50% or more of the entire population of Hungary, and left it a wasteland. The Mongols then reached the Adriatic Sea, and swept into Croatia, and then onto Bulgaria, and adding it to the vassal states bowing down to the Mongol Dominion.
The best generals. The greatest Kings and Emperors. The smartest and most powerful peoples in the world. All of them were feeble, and powerless against the rough barbarian Mongols from the steppes!
Amazing stuff!
[video=youtube;D4CIh_Lx8SY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D4CIh_Lx8SY[/youtube]
Here is some awesome Mongolian music--"Throat Singing" from the film, "Mongol." Excellent film by the way as well!
[video=youtube;3rPtuCvbUtw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3rPtuCvbUtw[/youtube]
Very interesting drawings of Mongol warriors, set as background to excellent Mongolian music!
The rise of the Mongolian Empire is astonishing, and mind-boggling how in 25 years, Ghengis Khan conquered more land and peoples than the Roman Empire accomplished in 400 years.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Shark you might enjoy Legend of Condor Heroes. The first two volumes have been translated into English (should be about four total)---and there are fan translations of the remaining volumes. There are also 40 episode drama series of it. It is set during the Song period and Genghis Khan is a character in the book (one of the Heroes grows up in his inner circle, even though he is Chinese). The whole story occurs against the backdrop of the Mongol invasion (and is continued in the sequel Return of Condor Heroes). Lots of very gameable content in these books.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1116238Shark you might enjoy Legend of Condor Heroes. The first two volumes have been translated into English (should be about four total)---and there are fan translations of the remaining volumes. There are also 40 episode drama series of it. It is set during the Song period and Genghis Khan is a character in the book (one of the Heroes grows up in his inner circle, even though he is Chinese). The whole story occurs against the backdrop of the Mongol invasion (and is continued in the sequel Return of Condor Heroes). Lots of very gameable content in these books.
Greetings!
That sounds awesome, Bedrock! Thank you! Legend of Condor Heroes. I will have to check that out, man! More about the Song Empire. Geesus. Bedrock, the Song Empire is so fucking incredible. I get all jazzed up about it. I know. I am just boggled by all the advancements they had, the culture, the standard of living, the art work, architecture, food, the whole beautiful buffet of colour, and life and brilliance. I honestly believe that people living in the Song Empire were really living in a special age of bliss and happiness. The life they had there was just fucking incredible. Restaurants and shops, open 24 hours, buddy! They had elite restaurants, highly trained chefs, and cook books that gathered recipes from around the empire, and got it published, where these cookbooks were sold all over the Song Empire.
In like, 1200 AD.
Let your mind marinate on that for awhile, you know?:D
Brilliant culture, and an amazing empire and people.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
And it all fell apart quickly after.
Many can destroy. Few can build.
Quote from: Shasarak;1116234Dan Carlin does a great podcast series on the Wrath of the Khans.
For me the brilliance of the Mongols was not just their military strength but also their diplomatic strategies to both divide and conquor and to absorb other cultures armies into their own.
Greetings!
Hey there, Shasarak! That's right, the Mongols were very good at that as well. They recruited hundreds of thousands and more, of other peoples as soldiers, generals, and craftsmen. Many warriors and officers from the Kingdom of Dali joined with the Mongols in their war against the Song Empire. Chinese siege engineers were with the Mongols in the siege of Baghdad, and the conquest of Persia. Elite Alan warriors from Central Asia, in the Caucasus region, served as special bodyguard units with the Mongol generals and the Khans, even years later when Kublai Khan was the emperor of the established Yuan Empire, far away in China.
I was also amazed at how the Mongols took care of the Muslim Assassins. Yeah, that secretive order of badass assassins that were feared by the Christians and causing problems for decades?
The Mongols hunted them all down, laying siege to every mountaintop fortress the Assassins had, and slaughtered them all. Boom, boom, boom. No mercy. No negotiations. The Mongols exterminated them, and never had a problem with the Assassins again.
I find it ironically amusing that the Christian armies could never get their shit together enough to accomplish anything near what the Mongols did in a fraction of time...in the blink of an eye, the Mongol had the entire Muslim world howling, from one end to the other. It's also interesting to see how the Crusaders were always entering into negotiations with the Muslims for this, or for that. Always.
The Mongols negotiation was simple. Get on your knees and surrender, or you will be annihilated. There was one huge Muslim city in Central Asia where every man, woman, child, every dog, cat, and every living thing in the city was killed. During the fighting, a relative of Ghengis Khan was killed in the fighting. The Mongol general's wife, presided over the subsequent annihilation of the Muslim city. I read where the estimates are that in the entire region of Khorasan, there were believed to be a population of 2,000,000 people. In several months, the Mongols had reduced the population to 200,000 people. Whole cities were annihilated so totally, like the great city of Merv, that they were an utter wasteland, and never recovered. Entire cities as graveyards. Towns and villages for hundreds of miles around, all choked and stacked with dead bodies, with only the occasional small group of women survivors, wailing in despair. It sometimes makes me think that the Mongols were like this medieval Atomic Bomb. They crushed and annihilated people and cities on a unimaginable scale, and swiftly, in the snap of a finger.
One story relates how Ghengis Khan as he swept through Central Asia, ordered 50,000 Mongol warriors to each slaughter 24 captured Muslim prisoners. The carnage is staggering in scale.
In other cities, the Mongols would slaughter every person above the height of a wagon wheel, except for the skilled craftsmen, and the women. The craftsmen would be sent in caravans back to Mongolia, and the women, in the tens of thousands, would be given to the Mongol warriors as slaves. All of this would happen in a few weeks or a month or so, and the Mongol army would be moving out, marching to strike another enemy, and bring some other army to their knees.
And meanwhile, all along the journey, many warriors pledged their loyalty to serve the Mongols, and marched under the Mongol banners. It was a pretty international force at least in many areas. There were always groups of craftsmen, siege engineers, merchants, and scholars, riding along with the Mongol juggernaut.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
It is really a shame that Ghengis Khan did not live at least another vigorous 20 years.
Greetings!
Do many of you have Mongolian-like tribes and cultures in your campaigns? A nomad, barbarian cultural environment is certainly a very different world than a western European-style town.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
What was the Mongol's advantage in battle that was so overwhelming?
Why couldn't they keep what they conquered?
Why did no later army emulate their success?
And why did the Mongols fall into historical obscurity?
Quote from: Spinachcat;1116520What was the Mongol's advantage in battle that was so overwhelming?
Why couldn't they keep what they conquered?
Why did no later army emulate their success?
And why did the Mongols fall into historical obscurity?
Greetings!
Excellent questions, my friend!
What was the Mongol's advantage in battle that was so overwhelming?
This, I think, is a fascinating question that the popular answer through standard scholarship on the surface seems to reach for a quick an obvious answer--that the Mongols were always mounted, well-armed, and ultimately swift and more mobile than their many adversaries. However, I believe that the truth of the matter, and a more accurate understanding, actually embraces the simple explanation, but goes far beyond it. It is generally true--the Mongols were well-armed, and swift, and more mobile than their many adversaries--but not merely in their tactical formations and deployment physically, on the battlefield. They were swift and mobile in their philosophy and thinking. Genghis Khan is quoted as often saying, "There is no good in anything until it is finished." In some ways, I see this statement as reflective of a deeply pragmatic approach to life, similar to "The ends justify the means." That is not to say that the Mongols did not believe or embrace a moral code, because they did. Their morality was often very devout and ruthlessly strict--but it was different from the moral philosophies typically embraced by civilized, sedentary, agriculture-based cultures.
The Mongols embraced a ruthlessly pragmatic philosophy of warfare, that number one, placed a premium on preserving the lives of Mongol soldiers; secondly, Mongol philosophy as part of their hunting, nomadic culture, demanded that they seek and use every advantage in which to survive. Mongol military philosophy reflected this central value as well, and always encouraged Mongol commanders to always seek out the best terrain, the best circumstances and most advantageous environment or battlefield, in which to fight against their enemies. This included of course, natural terrain, as well as climate, and time of season and day--but also in other factors, psychological factors, that the Mongols could create, inspire, and exploit in their enemies. For example, the Mongols often went into battle against their enemies, and used swarming tactics, and seemingly dividing their forces up into several, swiftly moving units--which then converged on the enemy and made mass arrow barrages, but also charges with heavier cavalry armed with lances. These Mongolian forces would use their superior mobility to attack, and withdraw, and attack again--all of the separate Mongolian units would be involved in doing this during a given battle, thus frequently making their enemies believe that the Mongol hordes vastly outnumbered them, and there were always more Mongolian forces arriving to overwhelm their own forces. This kind of tactic demoralized many enemies. Knowing this, the Mongols would often partially encircle an enemy army, and purposely leave a single escape route. Many, many enemies, believing themselves to be outnumbered, outmaneuvered, and always suffering more casualties from the unending barrages of arrows, their own leadership often dead, or wavering--would then leap at the apparent escape route. The Mongols knew that their enemies would respond in such a manner, and already had mounted units waiting in reserve, to then pursue the fleeing and panicked enemy forces.
The fleeing enemy forces were then promptly slaughtered by the fresh Mongolian forces sweeping in to pursue them. These enemy forces were far easier to slaughter and defeat as they were running away--than standing and fighting the Mongols in fierce battle. In this critically important tactic, the Mongols also kept their own losses at a minimum, while at the same time, maximizing the slaughtered enemy. More dead enemy soldiers *today*--meant fewer enemy soldiers to face the Mongol forces tomorrow. The Mongols essentially placed the survival of their own soldiers, and the achievement of victory--as a higher and total morality or moral value--above whatever the enemy believed was moral. Whatever the enemy felt was "moral" was absolutely irrelevant to the Mongols. What was the ultimate "moral good" for the Mongols, in their world view, was were more Mongol soldiers alive and well, and was victory achieved? It is with these primary moral values that shaped their military tactics. Deceit, trickery, feints, all manner of tactical deceptions, psychological warfare, ruses--none of these things were considered improper, shameful, or unacceptable in warfare, and pursuing victory.
The Mongols used barrels loaded with diseased rats to fire from their catapults in sieges against enemy cities--again, with the express purpose of causing more of the enemy to die, and thus reduce the strength of the enemy to resist and cause more Mongolian casualties. In a similar manner, as in the Mongol conquest of the Khwarazm Empire, the Mongols routinely marched tens of thousands of captured enemy Muslim civilians into the front ranks of their assault forces--with three goals in mind; psychologically stressing the defending Muslims, with them knowing that attempting to defend themselves, they were in so doing, slaughtering their own people out in front of their battlements; next, by employing such "Human Shields"--the Mongols were causing the enemy defenders to use their energy and their war supplies, arrows, and so on--against throngs of their own people, instead of using them against attacking Mongol warriors; the third purpose, as an extension, was that there were fewer Mongolian casualties. The Muslims, Christians, and Confucian/Taoist Chinese all believed such tactics were entirely evil, and unthinkable. The Mongols thought such was entirely fine and good tactics--at the end of the day, who was alive, and who was dead? Who were the masters, and who were on their knees?
Thus, I would say that it was a combination of:
(1): Tactical mobility and swiftness;
(2): Greater Tactical Consciousness of All Available Advantages in Warfare; Environmental, Climate, Physical Terrain, Supplies, and Psychology; A more keen appreciation philosophically of being always conscious of using whatever physical, environmental, climate and terrain to their advantage, prior to engaging in battle, to maximize their chances for victory against their enemies;
(3): Warrior Culture of Ruthless Discipline; the Mongols also had created a warrior culture that demanded a very high standard of individual discipline, toughness and rugged tenacity, a fierce esprit de corps among the warriors, and a sense of absolute ruthless discipline of obedience and loyalty to their commanding officers; The special organizational reforms created by Genghis Khan ignored blood, lineage, nobility, status--all of the values that choked operational flexibility and unity in the Chinese Empire, the Khwarazm Empire, the Caliphate, the Seljuk Turks, the Russian Princedoms, the Christian Kingdoms of Europe, and others. Merit, loyalty, efficiency, and skill were the primary values. Genghis Khan enforced these values on every Mongol, whether he was a Khan, an officer, or a common soldier. That kind of unit discipline and morale, and organizational unity and loyalty, truly were revolutionary for the day. No one else had anything like it, particularly on the mass scale that the Mongols achieved. Certainly, small units embraced such in non-Mongol nations, but not to the scale achieved by the Mongols, for the Mongols created and enforced this organization *systematically* on everyone, regardless of birth, status or where they were from. This was also demanded of foreign soldiers joining the Mongols and fighting under Mongol banners.
(4): Ruthless Moral Pragmatism; A deeper philosophy of ruthless pragmatism that placed the preservation of Mongol soldier's lives and the achievement of victory as being the highest priority, above any other concerns.
These four elements were vigorously embraced by every Mongol soldier and officer, each and every one, without exception. By Mongol law, a single Mongol soldier that retreated, would cause the other nine members as well as the coward, to be executed. Hence, Mongols very seldom retreated, without being ordered officially to do so. I imagine there may have been an instance or two where ordinary Mongol soldiers panicked and retreated, without orders, thus contributing to a defeat or rout, but such instances were extremely rare, and virtually unheard of. That kind of steel-like discipline and trust, that total confidence of unit morale, command and control, of everyone in the unit, the whole horde, being united together, and committed to victory or fighting to the death together, we can see is consistently true of Mongol armies fighting everywhere, from Central Asia and China, to Persia, Turkey, Russia, Europe, and the Balkans, whether in the field of open battle, or in sieges of great cities and fortresses.
Why couldn't they keep what they conquered?
Well, this is a good question that I too, have long wondered about. Some history books can be somewhat vague about this. Nonetheless, the answer seems to be best accounted for several elements. Remember also, the Mongolian Empire did not just persist while Genghis Khan was alive, and building his empire for 30 or 40 years; the Mongolian Empire endured, reaching an enormous zenith and flourishing until 1368. The Mongolian Empire had gradually been broken up into parts by the sons and descendants of Genghis Khan that were ruling several successor empires. The Golden Horde Khanate (Europe and Russia), the IlKhanate (Turkey, Syria and Persia), the Chagatai Khanate (Khwarazm Empire, Central Asia), and the Yuan Empire (Mongolia, Tibet, Korea, and China). The four successor empires of the Mongolian Empire were periodically loosely allied, but often embroiled in bitter civil wars against each other. The Mongols could not seem to hold onto what they had conquered, for the reasons of political ambition and civil war, family rivalries (some deep-seated emotional family dynamics which critically contributed to the rivalries and personal animosities that encouraged the civil wars between each other); holding onto a barbarian, tribal mentality (The Mongolian leadership for example viewed their ambitions primarily in light of their own personal glory, and the authority and glory of their own family, as opposed to really embracing a larger, national or cultural identity that was separate from themselves, and ultimately more important than themselves); Finally, the Mongol princes that inherited Ghengis Khan's glorious empire simply did not possess the absolute genius abilities of Ghengis Khan.
I would also say it is not entirely about his military genius, his strategic genius, his masterful skills in diplomacy, but also simply his great vision. (Ghengis Khan had a personal, cultural, social, and even spiritual vision for how to shape and build a new Mongolia, but also how to impose this new empire on the world, and change the world around it as well.) Ghengis Khan was a powerful, visionary thinker, and held visions of society, government, culture, and religions, that were very advanced and novel for anyone at the time, and the various descendants of his didn't really embrace these visions--they just couldn't really grasp and comprehend what Ghengis Khan was trying to forge with the Mongolian Empire.
Why did no later army emulate their success?
I would certainly say that the Mongols have had an immense influence on a huge variety of different cultures, impacting general culture, society, economies, and religious thought in many ways through the ages, but especially so in military tactics and organization. However, the military specifics of changing the structure of how a military force is organized, what equipment and weaponry it is equipped with, and what tactics it seeks to employ are useful, and powerful, but insufficient by themselves. Later armies did not possess the barbarian, nomadic mindset, lifestyle, and worldview, which deeply inculcated many of the principles that went into *how* the Mongols used their organization, equipment, and tactics to achieve such momentous and absolute victories. In addition, various future armies were not commanded and led by someone with the absolute genius of Ghengis Khan, or of the great General Subatai, or even Helagu.
And why did the Mongols fall into historical obscurity?
In my view, the Mongols, as a barbarian, nomadic culture, simply were not ready, as a culture, to embrace nationalism and a unified civilization. Even in the West, whether looking at Greece, Rome, Persia, the Britons, the Germanic tribes, and eastwards to India and China, embracing nationalism and a unified civilization generally takes several hundred years, sometimes more. The Mongols could not make such a transition in merely 150 years. They needed more time to do that, and with the frequent civil wars, the rebellions of conquered peoples, and the absence of an interior philosophical culture which could educate, train, and create more cultural elites to lead and train the nation, they could not soon reach such a place of national unity and identity. They naturally fell back into their old barbarian, tribal ways, with their endless feuding amongst families and clans over animals, local land, and interpersonal and family rivalries. Add up several generations of such tribalism, and they lost the status, wealth, and machinery of empire that were gained, and briefly held, by several earlier generations. Thus, in a relatively short span of time, the Mongols fell into historical obscurity--which is where they had always been historically before the arrival of Ghengis Khan.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: SHARK;1116604Why couldn't they keep what they conquered?
Maybe it is more simple then that. We have a saying: shirt sleeves to shirt sleeves in three generations. Genghis is the hard ass that earns the Empire and then his grandchildren are the softies that lose it.
Quote from: Shasarak;1116818Maybe it is more simple then that. We have a saying: shirt sleeves to shirt sleeves in three generations. Genghis is the hard ass that earns the Empire and then his grandchildren are the softies that lose it.
His descendants were pretty tough. Kublai Khan was no slouch, for example. It is probably a lot more to do with fragmentation of the empire and over-extension (it was an enormous empire).
Laid out like that its a philosophy of human demons. They only thrived on destroying what others had. When they ran out if stuff to steal they died. No wonder the mongols where solidified as just this inhuman demonic threat akin to the armies of mordor in russian folklore.
I guess it comes to show that dark lords are realistic as anything.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1116873Laid out like that its a philosophy of human demons. They only thrived on destroying what others had. When they ran out if stuff to steal they died. No wonder the mongols where solidified as just this inhuman demonic threat akin to the armies of mordor in russian folklore.
I guess it comes to show that dark lords are realistic as anything.
Greetings!
Hello my friend Shrieking Banshee! Well, the Mongols did not come *just to destroy* In fact, Ghengis Khan and his descendants routinely allowed foreign experts, craftsmen, engineers, and scholars to live. Some of them lived quite well, being well-cared for and rewarded by their Mongol masters. In addition, depending on the enemy, and the campaign, there were never any shortage of foreign troops as well as officers and generals eager to surrender to the Mongols, and also willing to serve under the Mongol banners. The Mongol conquerors skillfully recruited whole armies of foreign, non-Mongol troops, which then were used to extend the empire, and annihilate other enemies.
The Mongols valued their customs and ancient traditions, and it was required that all of the Khans be gathered whenever the Great Khan died. This is precisely what happened when the Mongol armies were gathering at the gates of Europe. The Great Khan had died, and so the Mongol leaders had to return to Mongolia in order to attend funeral ceremonies and rituals, and also to select a new Great Khan, and organize the new government.
This salient event is most certainly what saved Europe from the Mongols. The great Mongol general, Subatai, had made extensive plans to extend the Mongolian Empire to the shores of the Atlantic, and conquer all of Europe. After the Mongols had annihilated all of the large armies of Russia, conquered all of Russia, and then annihilated the powerful Christian armies of Poland and Hungary--Poland and Hungary both had been utterly crushed in a few weeks time--there was no army left in Christian Europe that would be able to withstand the mighty armies of the Mongols.
All of Europe would have been on their knees, groveling before the Mongol juggernaut.
I find it absolutely amazing how the Mongols--these supposedly simple, barbarian nomads--were able to consistently understand and know *how* their enemies thought, what buttons to press in order to make their enemies think and fear what the Mongols wanted them to, and then know precisely what and how their enemies would respond to such provocations and buttons being pressed by the Mongols during battle, and a campaign. The Chinese, the Muslims, the Russians, the Christians--they all were simply manipulated and corralled like big, giant herds of dumb sheep, rushing to their own slaughter and doom. The Mongols made it all look so pathetically easy and predictable.
Speaking of the Russians, indeed. Reading how the Mongol campaign to conquer Russia unfolded like clockwork. The Mongols first manipulated and deceived the Pechenegs amongst some other tribes in the Caucasus and Southern Russia, playing them off against each other, before sweeping them into an orgy of annihilation. Having a southern base secured, the Mongols then proceeded to goad and manipulate the Russian armies to run about over the steppes, and into a series of battles where the Russian armies were systematically slaughtered. The Mongols began the campaign asking the Russians for peace, and telling the Russians that the Mongols only quarrel was with the Kipchak tribes. The Kipchak tribes had previously fled before the onslaught of the Mongols as they swept through the steppes of Southern Russia, and had brought news of it to the Russians, as well as seeking shelter and friendship with the Russians. The Russian Grand Prince scorned the Mongols, and believed that the huge Russian armies, with their Kipchak allies, would easily crush the Mongol barbarians. The leading Russian Grand Prince was captured, with all of his elite nobles and retainers. The Russian nobles were laid out under wooden boards, and slowly crushed to death as the Mongol officers stood on top of them, feasting and dancing. The Russian Grand Prince, who had earlier scorned the Mongols and their offering of peace--was publicly tortured, and executed. He was beheaded, and his head was mounted on a pike. The Mongols send the head of the Russian Grand Prince ahead of them, to dozens of Russian cities and fortresses. All of the Russian cities were annihilated, and crushed, one after another. Only two were spared, further to the north, and even they submitted and bowed down to the Mongol dominion. The Mongols unleashed a savage hell against the Russians, annihilating them in the millions. For example, in the Ukraine region, the Mongols slaughtered fully 50% or more of the entire population; in the cities, the towns, and the countryside. All were swept up into a storm of slaughter and conquest. Only the women were sometimes spared, to be kept alive as slaves for their Mongol masters. Even though the Mongols enjoyed taking tens of thousands of slaves, they embraced an enduring passion for pursuing the slaughter and annihilation of entire populations, without discretion--tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, of men, women, and children were slaughtered in vast numbers throughout the villages, towns and cities of Russia. These campaigns were the opening chapters to the absolute dominion of the Khanate of the Golden Horde, which ruled the whole of Russia for some 250 years.
In a deep and powerful way, the Russians did seem to view the conquering Mongols as the armies of the Dark Lord, the savage and relentless armies of Mordor. The Russians would be broken under the yoke of slavery and dominion for over two centuries, gradually building their economy, their resources, their population. The Russians had an enormous and terrible catastrophe to somehow overcome, and survive. Slowly, cautiously, they did so. Along the way, less patient Russian nobles periodically raised armies and sought to rebel against the Mongols--with predictable results. The Mongols ruthlessly annihilated them, and increased the yoke of dominion even more, taking more gold, more resources, and more women. Eventually, the Russians would build their strength, discipline themselves, and unify themselves under the leadership of Tsar Ivan the Terrible, and throw off the yoke of the Mongol dominion.
Ivan the Terrible had to unify the Russian army and aristocracy, before any kind of campaign against the Mongols. There were lots of inter-regional rivalries and rebellions against Ivan the Terrible. Not everyone wanted to fight against the Mongols, or do so under Ivan's leadership. Some Russian leaders spoke of peace, and tolerance, and seeking ways of getting along with the Mongols. Ivan the Terrible was not gentle or merciful with his Russian rivals and opponents.
Ivan the Terrible had learned from the Mongols. Ivan the Terrible and the victorious Russian armies that threw off the yoke of Mongol dominion were not gentle or merciful to the Mongols, either.
Ivan the Terrible had set the foundations of the Russian Empire and nation--a nation that could only survive through absolute power, absolute discipline, and absolute authority.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: SHARK;1116912Greetings!
Hello my friend Shrieking Banshee! Well, the Mongols did not come *just to destroy* In fact, Ghengis Khan and his descendants routinely allowed foreign experts, craftsmen, engineers, and scholars to live. Some of them lived quite well, being well-cared for and rewarded by their Mongol masters.
Again, "Dark Lord Zolgoroth" type territory. Not saying their conquest machine wasn't well lubricated, well maintained or well built: I'm saying it was still primarily a conquest machine powered by devouring what others had built. The bigger it got the more violently it would have imploded eventually.
Its impressive, but also terrifying. But I will fully admit that being Ukrainian (The Russian Kingdom before Moscow), I kinda am tinged with disgust at Mongols on a....everything else level. Not to say that Ukrainian Kings and queens didn't have their fair share of "Built on Blood" mentality.
Id say in a way Russia inherited the Mongols pragmatism, but it's a dark depressive culture.
Russia in a way is a culture that's emotionally BROKEN. There is a deep and painful BREAK in the people. Its people that don't want to live in a way. I can't laud that broken child. I can't laud what the Mongols did. Not even on a conceptual level.
If there is a hell, I hope their rotting in it for all eternity.
edit: Your post to me reads something like "Isn't it interesting that what happened to Russia could have happened to the rest of the world as well?"
I again find it less interesting than horrifying.
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1116916Again, "Dark Lord Zolgoroth" type territory. Not saying their conquest machine wasn't well lubricated, well maintained or well built: I'm saying it was still primarily a conquest machine powered by devouring what others had built. The bigger it got the more violently it would have imploded eventually.
Its impressive, but also terrifying. But I will fully admit that being Ukrainian (The Russian Kingdom before Moscow), I kinda am tinged with disgust at Mongols on a....everything else level. Not to say that Ukrainian Kings and queens didn't have their fair share of "Built on Blood" mentality.
Id say in a way Russia inherited the Mongols pragmatism, but it's a dark depressive culture.
Russia in a way is a culture that's emotionally BROKEN. There is a deep and painful BREAK in the people. Its people that don't want to live in a way. I can't laud that broken child. I can't laud what the Mongols did. Not even on a conceptual level.
If there is a hell, I hope their rotting in it for all eternity.
edit: Your post to me reads something like "Isn't it interesting that what happened to Russia could have happened to the rest of the world as well?"
I again find it less interesting than horrifying.
Greetings!
Hey there, Shrieking Banshee! Yeah, I can't disagree with you with much vigor about the Mongols embracing a machine of conquest that was more bent on destruction and slaughter than building anything.:D I am merely reminded that Ghengis Khan possessed a grand vision of building the Mongol nation, and the Mongolian Empire, with a number of elements that were visionary, in the sense that he wanted extensive, free trade; an empire ruled by laws; an empire that embraced religious freedom. He had some greater plans, but much of which was not really understood or embraced by his descendants. In addition, Kublai Khan desired to blend Mongolian and Chinese civilizations, and actually built numerous city improvements, sponsored temples, trade, laws, art, and education, land development, amongst many other things that reflected his desire to build a flourishing and successful empire. In fact, a civil war that broke out between Kublai Khan and his relative that ruled Mongolia was in some real ways because many traditional Mongols in the *north* felt that Kublai Khan was unworthy of rule, because he had become "too Chinese" and had forgotten the ways of the Mongols.:D
I agree, the Mongol campaign against Russia was savage and terrible. My mind is boggled by the wholesale slaughter of populations for example, in Ukraine, but also Hungary. It is a grim and horrifying tragedy, Shrieking Banshee. On a historical note, a happy one, I think, well, more of a "silver lining" kind of thing. In Hungary, apparently, after the Mongols had wiped out 50% of the entire population, in the ensuing years, the Hungarian king met with several Central Asian nomad tribes that were fleeing from the Mongols, as they had become enemies. The Hungarian king embraced these Asian tribes, befriended them, and made deep alliances with them. Part of the alliance required that both Hungarian peoples and these Asian peoples would purposely welcome intermarriages between the two societies, and the nomad tribes were given the same rights, as Hungarians, as well as special rights in regards to keeping pasture lands and raising their horses. Long story short, the Hungarians were very prominent in all of European history to establish forms of democracy, equality, and a kind of open-minded, refreshing culture, that most in the rest of Europe would not really begin to grapple with and engage with for another 500 years, or more in many ways.
I find the Mongol conquests to be terrible and savage, but in a military and social way to be ironic. So many arrogant, proud Muslims, Chinese, and Christians mocked the Mongols, and were then absolutely wrecked in lightning speed. I find it to be tragic that much of the slaughter which would be brought upon so many peoples by the Mongols is directly at the feet of so many stupid, proud, arrogant kings and generals of the *civilized world* Time and time again, they would make the same stupid battle plans, using forces equipped in the same stupid ways, and fight against the Mongols in the same, stupid tactics and organization that got others annihilated so easily. It's like they somehow insisted that their religious faith, or their civilized "virtue" would be sufficient to gain them victory over the Mongols. All the while, of course, being entirely arrogant and blind and deaf to listening to anyone wanting to do something different. No, no, we can just keep doing what we have always done. No need to change troop formations, units, or tactics. No need to look at these Mongol invaders in any kind of different way. We've got this easily won!
And their armies--many times very large armies--of valiant, loyal soldiers--were just marched into a slaughterhouse. Once they were crushed, of course, there was nothing left to protect the civilian populations.
Sadly, it took a long time for many peoples and civilizations to learn, to grow, to think differently.
I have a bit of credulousness and harsh, ironic amusement, in the sense that all of these peoples were so ignorant. There were considerable lessons that had been learned and taught from far back as Alexander the Great, Julius Caesar, and the Emperor Trajan, as well as the great Byzantine general, Belisarius. All of which embraced a variety of troop organization, tactics, and most important, *thinking* that everyone seemed entirely oblivious to in the 13th century, some 600 years after Belisarius, and many more years than that from the others. It isn't like the knowledge, the tactics, the flexible thinking wasn't there, because it was. It existed, and it was even in books. All of the Christians, and the Muslims possessed these books. The Chinese didn't, of course, but they had similar history and lessons going back over a thousand years as well, to the Tang Dynasty, and to the great Emperor Qin Shi Huangdi.
None of them had learned the hard lessons from history, you know? That's what makes me shake my head and laugh, as in battle after battle, the assumptions made by the Chinese, the Muslims, the Christians, are always the same, with the same horrifying results. After three, or four, or a dozen battles, it makes me wonder geesus, what the fuck is wrong with these people?:D
It's interesting how the whole "authoritarian" thing has been interpreted in the West, as regards to Russia. I have always found that attitude of the West also being dismissive f the Russian experience as being smug and arrogant. It's like, well, dumbasses, maybe the Russians think differently about authority, obedience, freedom, and philosophy in general, because they were conquered by the Mongols for over 200 years? Maybe that might have something to do with some of the philosophical differences between the West and Russia, you know?
What is this about the Russian culture being emotionally broken, my friend? I definitely want to hear your thoughts more about that! It's deeply fascinating to me, but also important to understand the Russians, and to embrace empathy and friendship with them.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: SHARK;1116920None of them had learned the hard lessons from history, you know?
What is this about the Russian culture being emotionally broken, my friend? I definitely want to hear your thoughts more about that! It's deeply fascinating to me, but also important to understand the Russians, and to embrace empathy and friendship with them.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Im not Russian but Ukrainian. Its a weird thing but the "Russian" empire was more called the "Russ Kingdom" (Is the closest way I can call it), after its destruction at the hands of the mongols, it reformed with moscow being its central capital instead of Ukraine and is what we know as the "Russian Empire". In Russian, it's not even pronounced "Russia" but "Rossea". This isn't be being all "YOU SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BIGOT" but me explaining stuff I like to explain. Anyway back to the main point:
And I can see there being satisfaction in seeing people BTFOED in believing their inherent virtue had some kind of power, that the very path they walked made them holy and so they didn't need to learn "tactics" or "Adapt to an Enemy". There is some satisfaction in such a humbling.
But it's like "A feminist from Sweden was raped and had her organs stolen in an African Nation after insisting she would be safe hitchhiking" kind of satisfaction. Because yeah there is a rise and a fall, but there are real people involved, and you could say yes their biggest sin was pride, but it was pride IN virtue. Pride in a sense of conduct and pride in a belief in a better tomorrow. And them being brutalized for it has some dark comedy, but sadly a level of condemnation of what humans actually are. That maybe evil is intrinsically stronger than good.
Like before I really understood Russia (And Ukraine), I never understood why "Faith" was a virtue in the monotheistic religions (or at least Judaism and Christianity, but some expression of it I see aspects of in most religeons). Because Russia, and to a much stronger extent Ukraine are completely faithless nations. Oh there is some national zeal sometimes, and some religious folk dwells there. But the soul of the nation is dead, and most of that is play-acting, like a couple pretending there is still energy in their marriage. Like Tyrants are Russia and Ukraine's coping mechanism because without them they just can't will themselves to live. And Ukraine is Russia on crack when it comes to this
You just watch people with glassy eyes, with no love to anything around them. Ukraine actually BEATS Japans negative growth rate. It shares that spot with other east block nations like Latvia. People like that just wish they never were born. They watch the world crumble around them and secretly hope for death.
Again, not the worst living conditions, or mass starvation or something. People just wish they don't wake up after falling asleep. Ukraine is also ranked I believe the unhappiest nation in europe. So I believe that's the only other record it holds outside of military dissertation in modern naval history.
Again Il end this with a #notall. Ultimately these are my experiences.
Maybe I guess to me, modern times have very little value in "Faith". They think it holds them back and is what stupid people cling too.....But when I think of ideologies that truly embrace faithlessness I more think of Corporations (My Dads is an Exec for an advisory company, and even he gets creeped out by the stuff they can predict, see and do) and Socialist Megastates (How interesting that those spaces popped up in Mongol thrashed areas).
I guess I read about the Mongols before, and their efficiency and smarts, but the way you laid them out, It made it sound like hey truly embraced BEING demonic. And yeah I guess being demons over a slave caste was great for the demons, but even as you pointed out there is no going back from being a demon once you become one.
In conclusion, I have no idea what I just rambled about. Probably a whole bunch of garbage. =P
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1116921Im not Russian but Ukrainian. Its a weird thing but the "Russian" empire was more called the "Russ Kingdom" (Is the closest way I can call it), after its destruction at the hands of the mongols, it reformed with moscow being its central capital instead of Ukraine and is what we know as the "Russian Empire". In Russian, it's not even pronounced "Russia" but "Rossea". This isn't be being all "YOU SHOULD HAVE KNOWN BIGOT" but me explaining stuff I like to explain. Anyway back to the main point:
And I can see there being satisfaction in seeing people BTFOED in believing their inherent virtue had some kind of power, that the very path they walked made them holy and so they didn't need to learn "tactics" or "Adapt to an Enemy". There is some satisfaction in such a humbling.
But it's like "A feminist from Sweden was raped and had her organs stolen in an African Nation after insisting she would be safe hitchhiking" kind of satisfaction. Because yeah there is a rise and a fall, but there are real people involved, and you could say yes their biggest sin was pride, but it was pride IN virtue. Pride in a sense of conduct and pride in a belief in a better tomorrow. And them being brutalized for it has some dark comedy, but sadly a level of condemnation of what humans actually are. That maybe evil is intrinsically stronger than good.
Like before I really understood Russia (And Ukraine), I never understood why "Faith" was a virtue in the monotheistic religions (or at least Judaism and Christianity, but some expression of it I see aspects of in most religeons). Because Russia, and to a much stronger extent Ukraine are completely faithless nations. Oh there is some national zeal sometimes, and some religious folk dwells there. But the soul of the nation is dead, and most of that is play-acting, like a couple pretending there is still energy in their marriage. Like Tyrants are Russia and Ukraine's coping mechanism because without them they just can't will themselves to live. And Ukraine is Russia on crack when it comes to this
You just watch people with glassy eyes, with no love to anything around them. Ukraine actually BEATS Japans negative growth rate. It shares that spot with other east block nations like Latvia. People like that just wish they never were born. They watch the world crumble around them and secretly hope for death.
Again, not the worst living conditions, or mass starvation or something. People just wish they don't wake up after falling asleep. Ukraine is also ranked I believe the unhappiest nation in europe. So I believe that's the only other record it holds outside of military dissertation in modern naval history.
Again Il end this with a #notall. Ultimately these are my experiences.
Maybe I guess to me, modern times have very little value in "Faith". They think it holds them back and is what stupid people cling too.....But when I think of ideologies that truly embrace faithlessness I more think of Corporations (My Dads is an Exec for an advisory company, and even he gets creeped out by the stuff they can predict, see and do) and Socialist Megastates (How interesting that those spaces popped up in Mongol thrashed areas).
I guess I read about the Mongols before, and their efficiency and smarts, but the way you laid them out, It made it sound like hey truly embraced BEING demonic. And yeah I guess being demons over a slave caste was great for the demons, but even as you pointed out there is no going back from being a demon once you become one.
In conclusion, I have no idea what I just rambled about. Probably a whole bunch of garbage. =P
Greetings!
The "Russ Kingdom." Yes, indeed. That's very interesting, Shrieking Banshee! Oh, and thank you. No offense taken my friend! It's always good to learn deeper details of history! I think it is interesting as you mentioned, how the rise of Muscovy really got going after the Mongol conquest. Before that, Kiev was the main focus. Unfortunately, the Mongols totally destroyed Kiev. I also think the huge slaughter of the Ukrainian population had a powerful effect in changing the political and cultural focus further to the north, in rising Muscovy. It's probably because there wasn't many people left, you know? Not in an organized manner like there existed before, I imagine. The old Kievan Rus of Vladimir was gone.
"...but there was pride IN virtue. Pride in a sense of conduct and pride in a belief in a better tomorrow." That's very important to remember, Shrieking Banshee. I like that. Faith is very important, and meaningful, Shrieking Banshee. You are right. It has always been embraced as a powerful and noble virtue.
"Like Tyrants are Russia and Ukraine's coping mechanism..." Damn, that's neat, and funny, too.:D It goes back to the ancient Western European assessment of how "Russia" loves authoritarianism. I think it is very interesting thinking about how and why this propensity for such a philosophy has seemed to have such a hold in Russia and Ukraine for so long. It is interesting to see how considerably *divided* the whole region was, politically and such, before the arrival of the Mongols. It doesn't seem to me that the Russians, Ukrainians, and other Slavic tribes of the region had any particular favour towards authoritarianism before the Mongols. They seemed as fractious and loud as any other kingdom or peoples throughout Northern and Western Europe, you know?
Hey, Shrieking Banshee, not "a whole bunch of garbage" at all, my friend! I love learning, and studying history and cultures. I think it is valuable and meaningful for you, me, for everyone to learn, and think, and consider history, cultures, and conflicts. To ponder, and reason, and wonder at the glory, as well as the stupidity of our ancestors.:D
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: Spinachcat;1116520Why did no later army emulate their success?
Because you need a society of nomadic horse archers to begin with for that. That's a pattern you see through the ages: Fighting style, tactics and technologies are a product of society, and you can't just copy a successful model if your society doesn't provide the basis.
The tried and true method to fight an army of nomad horse archers was to hire your own tribe of nomad horse archers to do the fighting for you, and the Mongols often won their battles by bribing or otherwise convincing those tribes to join them instead. Their success is deeply rooted in successful diplomacy.
I was being a bit melodramatic before, I was fighting a nasty tooth graft infection. Im better now.
I still stand by what I said before, just I should have been less melodramatic
Quote from: Shrieking Banshee;1116940I was being a bit melodramatic before, I was fighting a nasty tooth graft infection. Im better now.
I still stand by what I said before, just I should have been less melodramatic
Greetings!
Damn, Shrieking Banshee. That doesn't sound fun at all. I hope you are feeling better soon with that.:D
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
No Genghis Khan thread is complete without:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4043[/ATTACH]
The Duke never dies - of course the Mongols were unstoppable.
I read and enjoyed a biography of Genghis Khan called Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4044[/ATTACH]
In addition to providing the biographical information about who Temujin was, it posits that a lot of the foundations of a mutli-ethnic/multi-religious state were developed by the Mongols. Allowing 'foreigners' to achieve high office based on their loyalty and contributions and a focus on trade-based wealth accumulation are a couple of the oft-overlooked hallmarks of the Mongol Empire.
Quote from: deadDMwalking;1117077No Genghis Khan thread is complete without:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4043[/ATTACH]
The Duke never dies - of course the Mongols were unstoppable.
I read and enjoyed a biography of Genghis Khan called Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4044[/ATTACH]
In addition to providing the biographical information about who Temujin was, it posits that a lot of the foundations of a mutli-ethnic/multi-religious state were developed by the Mongols. Allowing 'foreigners' to achieve high office based on their loyalty and contributions and a focus on trade-based wealth accumulation are a couple of the oft-overlooked hallmarks of the Mongol Empire.
Greetings!
You know, DeadDMwalking, the book, Ghengis Khan and the Making of the Modern World, by Jack Weatherford, is an excellent book. I entirely agree. Jack Weatherford's also done some other books, one about the Mongol queens, that is also an outstanding and illuminating work. I highly recommend Jack Weatherford.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1116847His descendants were pretty tough. Kublai Khan was no slouch, for example. It is probably a lot more to do with fragmentation of the empire and over-extension (it was an enormous empire).
Greetings!
You know, BedrockBrendan, that's an important point. Large empires are not impossible to manage and run, after all, but there is the central point that the larger an empire is, the more difficult it becomes to manage. It seems to me that there are more "moving parts" to deal with, and there is not enough organizational and administrative talent to go around in which to address all of those different "moving parts"--thus giving rise to stronger, growing problems. Such problems then mushroom, and spiral out of control. It's an interesting viewpoint to see the whole tapestry of the Mongol Empire, when for example, you have a huge campaign going on in the West, conquering Russia and Eastern Europe. Simultaneously, there is an enormous campaign going on with Mongol armies fighting against the Muslims in Anatolia and Syria. Then, there are rebellions popping up in southern and eastern Persia. Then, you have a huge war going on against the Song Empire in Southern China.
And, of course, there are scheming going on and intrigue between the different Khan's Imperial Courts. I have found also that it is not always directly attributable to some particular strife between a pair of Imperial Khans, brothers or cousins they may be, but also oftentimes enmities, jealousies, and rivalries between various courtiers, generals, their wives and concubines, and other advisors and court officials, one or more of which, are opposed to some second-rank general, family relative, or advisor of some other Khan. That kind of intrigue and rivalry festers and grows, and contributes to suspicion, miscommunication, social backstabbing, and eventual civil war between gathered armies. It's a very dangerous sequence of events and relationships.
It's true that many of the primary Khans were heavily involved with this rivalry or that dispute, but sometimes even they can be otherwise taken by surprise by some emerging conflict between family members or court officials, and they themselves are kind of propelled along with the flow of events and growing animosity. Very interesting!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Greetings!
BedrockBrendan, I have recently received the Legend of the Condor Heroes books, which I ordered from Amazon. They should be interesting reading!:D
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: SHARK;1118154Greetings!
BedrockBrendan, I have recently received the Legend of the Condor Heroes books, which I ordered from Amazon. They should be interesting reading!:D
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Hope you enjoy it! If you like it, there is a series of movies based on it (should be on Prime) called Brave Archer. Tons of TV series with like 50 episodes too.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1118170Hope you enjoy it! If you like it, there is a series of movies based on it (should be on Prime) called Brave Archer. Tons of TV series with like 50 episodes too.
Greetings!
Awesome, BedrockBrendan! I am looking forward to it. Fascinating stuff! I also recently got The Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
I think the culture and history of Ancient China is so interesting. I love how they have dealt with various challenges and problems, sometimes with brilliant solutions. And yet, disturbingly, they also have with the perennial *cycles* seem to have the exact same problems of jealousy, hatred, love, rivalries, corruption, idealism, and tyranny that have plagued every major government and culture in the West as well. Scheming empresses, proud emperors, treacherous eunuchs, sons all vying for their father's love and favour, the whole human pathos on full display!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Shark,
Here's a sad commentary on the state of academic studies of the Mongols these days:
Call for Papers: Chinggisid Crises & Eurasian Responses International Medieval Congress, University of Leeds, 1-4 July 2024 [Announcement]
Geoffrey Humble
Location
United Kingdom
The theme for IMC 2024 will be 'Crisis'. Hoping to repeat the success of the IMC 2023 Chinggisid Ripples sessions we invite paper proposals relating to a very broad conception of crisis relating to any period and aspect of Mongol conquest and rule within and across Eurasia. Here the concept of crisis is not limited to the mid-fourteenth-century upheavals affecting imperial Mongol political formations. Crisis should absolutely be taken in its broadest form, including impacts of conquest and empire at any level, location or period.
We are particularly keen to involve PhD students and early career scholars. More senior scholars are also very welcome, and we are very happy to involve session moderators and round-table participants.
You can find the IMC Call for Papers, with links to practical information on session submission and attendance, at https://www.imc.leeds.ac.uk/imc-2024/.
Topics of interest may include, but are not limited to:
- Institutional precarity, fragility and failure
- Problem-solving, durability, adaptation and opportunity
- Trauma, emotion and mourning
- Memory, forgetting and erasure
- Community, communication and interaction
- Home, migration, uprooting and exile
- Food, provision, shortage, hoarding and profiteering
- Agriculture and land use
- Language, translation and (mis)understanding
- Coping, continuity and (re-)construction
- Gendered roles and their disruption
- Injury, ill health, healing and recovery
- Disability, infirmity and support strategies
- Scapegoating, blame and condemnation
- Conspiracy, plot and exposure
- Slavery, kidnap and forced migration
- Economic crisis and indebtedness
- Political economy, taxation
- Infrastructure development and decay
- Inequalities, and the unequal impacts of crises
- Religious and or spiritual crisis and change
- Prayer and appeals for divine assistance
- Narrating crisis and historiographical responses
- Changing, evolving and disrupted forms of office holding
- Elites, patronage and charity
Note what you don't see here is any reference to actual military affairs, conquest etc. Next these idiots will be convening panels on Mongol DEI
Greetings!
Wow, Persimmon!
That is very sad! A mixture of laughably pathetic--and stunning disappointment.
No military topics, of course. History is all about DEI. And FEELINGS.
When I was in college, I had the misfortune of being saddled with several courses by professors--women--that studied say, the Early Middle Ages, or America in the 1930's and 1940's. Both classes, as I recall, focused greatly on "Society", women, minorities, religion, and sex--and provided only the briefest study of anything to do with the military or warfare.
I had to slog through some obscure, pathetic period books, as well as modern historiographical analysis of such tepid books. The material in every sense, whether primary sources or modern historiography--was mind-numbingly boring, and so *niche* historically speaking, I often marveled at what was the whole point of anyone studying any of this? It all seemed so entirely personal, emotional, stuff involving some woman author's emotional state and feelings, her being oppressed by the men around her, and her contributions to quilting, creating women's clothing, and writing newspaper articles championing women's issues and feelings. Blah, blah, blah.
It is like there are some of these terrible professors and academics that sit around and ponder how they can take a huge, fascinating period of history--and somehow make discussion of it as boring, meaningless, and irrelevant as possible. ;D
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: SHARK on October 09, 2023, 07:54:35 AM
Greetings!
Wow, Persimmon!
That is very sad! A mixture of laughably pathetic--and stunning disappointment.
No military topics, of course. History is all about DEI. And FEELINGS.
When I was in college, I had the misfortune of being saddled with several courses by professors--women--that studied say, the Early Middle Ages, or America in the 1930's and 1940's. Both classes, as I recall, focused greatly on "Society", women, minorities, religion, and sex--and provided only the briefest study of anything to do with the military or warfare.
I had to slog through some obscure, pathetic period books, as well as modern historiographical analysis of such tepid books. The material in every sense, whether primary sources or modern historiography--was mind-numbingly boring, and so *niche* historically speaking, I often marveled at what was the whole point of anyone studying any of this? It all seemed so entirely personal, emotional, stuff involving some woman author's emotional state and feelings, her being oppressed by the men around her, and her contributions to quilting, creating women's clothing, and writing newspaper articles championing women's issues and feelings. Blah, blah, blah.
It is like there are some of these terrible professors and academics that sit around and ponder how they can take a huge, fascinating period of history--and somehow make discussion of it as boring, meaningless, and irrelevant as possible. ;D
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Indeed, Shark.
Academia has been a Leftist echo chamber for a long time, but it's just getting worse. This past Friday I was at a meeting for those of us teaching Honors classes. And the topics of most of the other classes were a sad reflection of the state of the profession. Courses on "The Philosophy of Bad Movies," and shit like that. One guy discussed how "problematic" it was that not all his students outright hated the Jesuits for their racist portrayals of (Asian) Indians in the 16th century. Another one, teaching musical theatre, talked about how difficult it was to show students musicals from other eras because of their racist and homophobic depictions. Really? Musical theatre was homophobic in the 1980s? Other professors apologized for teaching from a position of white privilege. And the Dean of the Honors College, a woke female English professor, apologized for the "problematic optics" of only having men teaching Honors this semester. Ughhh...
My Honors class this semester has nothing to do with military history (it's about Heian Japanese court culture), but I give it to them straight, no anachronistic women's rights B.S.
And next semester, when I teach Modern Military History (1775-present) the students are going to read the classics: Clausewitz, Mahan, Van Creveld, Mao, Che Guevara, etc. and they will be forced to apply these teachings to the studies of actual battles & campaigns, not fucking knitting.