How did the mongols go from some bumfuck nomad group that occasionally harasses China to steamrolling most of Asia that just fucked whatever state was in the way? And why were they able to gain such momentum?
Mongol was Chinese
>tfw Mamluks prevented Mongols from eventually entering Africa
>there never will be an African Khanate
>>876970
WE
>>876992
WUZ
>>877135
CHINKZ
>>876966
The chinese they conquered werent chinese and the Shah had a massive army but very few of his cities were loyal, most went over to the mongols mainly as a fuck you to the shah.
>>876966
Genghis Khan was an amazing leader. He was literally godly at picking talented, loyal people and operated a meritocracy so the best people got the top jobs. Instead of killing his enemies he assimilated their best aspects, their people, and their knowledge.
The steppe horsemen are incredibly resilient because of their nomadic lifestyle in such a harsh environment where agriculture isn't possible. They were like supermen compared to the agrarian cultures of the time. They didn't need extensive supply columns and could live off the land, supporting massive troops and a massive number of horses to conquer thousands of kilometres of land, advancing rapidly.
Whereas most armies only had a small portion of their units as cavalry, the entire mongol army was mounted, and could move at the speed of a horse. That was an unbelievably large advantage compared to everyone else who could only move at walking speed. Mongol numbers were always overestimated because their enemies thought there was no way these guys who were in (this city) could be in (that city) within a few days, it just wasn't possible for anyone else. They traversed conditions no one else could. They went through desert on horses that everyone else though impassible. They invaded Russia in the winter, which everyone else through history has regarded as suicide. In fact the Mongols generally liked to invade in winter, the complete opposite of everyone else.
A major problem the mongols had later on was their people becoming too native and losing their steppe superman edge, so they'd have to send people back to Mongolia to stay tough. They all trained with horses and bows from birth so were the best in the world at shooting arrows and riding horses, simultaneously.
>How did Macedonians go from barbarians to glory?
>How did the Huns go from barbarians to glory?
>How did Arabs go from barbarians to glory?
>How did Mongols go from barbarians to glory?
>>877259
They also had the best generals and tactics in the world, like Subutai. They would always manipulate their enemies against each other with subterfuge and clever diplomacy, then harass their logistics, and always fight on the battlefield of their choosing. They constantly defeated forces much larger than their own, for example Subutai and Jeb's scouting force of ~10,000 basically destroyed the entire of eastern europe/russia and probably about 100,000 enemies. In battle they were masters at feigning defeat. This might sound easy to modern ears, but in those times, in actual battle where the main objective was to cause your opponents to panic and run away, a feigned rout could EASILY turn into a real rout without enough discipline, morale and expertise. The Mongols were expert at doing this, they practiced their acting skills so they could appear panicked and trick their opponents. It worked basically every time. Then they'd lead their advancing enemy into a trap, and mow them down with thousands of arrows.
The Mongols were also able to employ modern military tactics hundreds of years before it became common in the napoleonic era, specifically I mean they were able to coordinate multiple columns and armies hundreds of miles away from each other in a combined strategy. Their army was divided into groupings and units that are still common today, whereas their opponents would just be a large mob of people hastily gathered and not trained, except for a minority. The mongols base unit was about 10 guys who lived as brothers, and if one of them ran away, they'd all be put to death. If one of them was captured, the rest were expected to rescue him or they'd be put to death. As a group these 10 men were able to choose their own leader and if they thought their squad captain wasn't doing a good job they could choose another one of them to lead. Good soldiers advanced through the ranks quickly to the top.
They also liked to roll people up in carpets.
HISTORICAL ARSONISTS
Why do so many people refuse to believe that if Ogedei didn't die the Mongols would have swept through Europe and conquered it? Do people really believe Europe was stronger than China, or that the European terrain would have magically stopped the Mongols where the desert and chinese forest didn't?
>>877671
Most of europes castles were stone not dirt or mud like most of chinas/central asias, the density of castles was much higher too.
Europe didnt have a reliance/previously existing relationships with the mongols so no one was going to open up without a fight or switch sides during a battle.
There is also significantly less food available for their horses. The Mongols moved with a truly staggering amount of horses. The average soldier had 5, many having much more. When they conquered the southern song (which took decades) they already had much of northern china secure and supplying their armies. Where would that grain/grass come from in europe?
Part of the reason batu left europe was because the great hungarian plain couldnt supply enough grass for his horses. He also didnt successfully take a single stone castle.
China was more powerful but Europe provided a different set of challenges.
>>877671
Because they are biased.
13th century Europe was a pisspoor backwater compared to Middle East, Central Asia, and the China. Even Europe's most glorious, the richest city Constantinople was nothing compared to great cities which Mongols already had under control. The very reason Romans moved its capital from Rome to Constantinople, in the first place, was to be closer to the riches of Asia. Mongols came, saw what a shithole Europe really is and never bothered with it again. Risk/reward ratio just wasn't good in that gloomy, muddy, boring place. There is even an account of a German priest trying to smuggle a roll of silk from Byzantium. It got confiscated at the border, which led him to lament the decadence and the riches of Constantinople. Just goes to show how poor West Europe was at that time. By the time Mongols rolled into Europe, the continuation of Rome, Constantinople was already robbed and raped by Western European religious hooligans. It had became a mere shadow of its former self. The crown jewel of Europe didn't even pique the interest of Mongols. So Mongols settled down as the ruling elites from the Pacific to the Mediterranean. Mongol rule lasted until 1920 with the fall of the Emir of Bukhara.
Every Mongol soldier wore a silk undergarment. While a priest from Western Europe couldn't even carry a roll of silk back home.
>mongolaboos
Lmao killed by the fucking wind, how can anyone take such a pathetic, piss poor empire seriously?
Mongols steamrolled every major superpower of its era. Romans/Britain merely rounded up less organized, less technologically developed people of its time.
>>878395
>conquer China
>roll in silk
Gee I wonder why the people half the world apart from silk's production areas had trouble affording it.
>>877168
Wait, didn't the Mongols completelly massacre the Muslim populations?
>>879007
Thank you based Mongols
>>879007
In an ideal world a restored Mongol Empire would have saved us from communism too.
>>879129
In an ideal world Nicholas would have been granted asylum and lived in George's court and learnt western values
>>879382
The bombing is hugely controversial among western intellectuals
>>879103
Mongols is a huge reason why Muslims are such a problem today and why the Muslim world is so under developed
>>878009
Based. Shit's practically a mounted Napoleonic infantry line formation
Are there any other similar "fire and switch" tactics in history contemporary or preceding the Mongols?
>>879382
>tens of millions of people killed indescriminently vs killing 200k to stop a war
top kek
not even a remotely fair comparison
>>879382
> Japan
> Seeking to surrender
Should have surrender unconditionally or at least not with the complete bullshit terms they made up that wasn't much of a surrender.
>>879382
There was plenty of warning before the bombs.
memegals
>>878395
This was for practical reasons, though, and not a sign of wastefulness (given the relative abundance of silk the Mongols could demand from the Chinese).
Properly woven silk has the neat property of resisting the piercing force of arrows while not necessarily withstanding the impact force. Meaning that a suit of silk under your armour meant that while the arrow would enter the body with its tip, you could pull it out by holding on to the silk and pulling it to force it out of the wound.
>>878096
This is a huge reason. If you read about the hungarian or polish invasion, they weren't prepared to effectively seige the european fortifications. They absolutely obliterated whole villages still, but very few, if any, actually fortified places were taken. It's quite different fighting in european forests than on the steppe.
>>879845
Mongols fought in south chinese hills and the desert, they could absolutely operate outside of the steppe.
The most advanced fortifications in the world were in Jin and Song China, and the Mongols took them. Admittedly the Song were the greatest challenge the Mongols ever faced and it took decades, so the Mongols probably would have needed to bring as much of their guys and siege engineers with them as possible if they wanted to take all these castles. Still, I don't doubt that Subutai, given enough resources, would have figured out a way to beat the armies of Christendom, especially after decisively annihilating the largest threat Europe could muster in the east. Logistics would have been the main issue and whether the Mongols thought it was worth the trouble. I remain unconvinced by everyone who says that European castles and terrain were some kind of kryptonite to Mongols though, as if they were somehow better than what the Song had
Does anyone have any sources regarding the number of soldiers the central and western kingdoms would have been able to muster to combat the mongols?
>tfw you will never get to go to an alternate reality and read about a situation where the mongols advanced and attempted to take HRE/Italy/France
>>879007
Why post this blatant insult to history? "Islamic extremism" holy kek people actually believe that? You uncultured pleb, the only reason we got the enlightenment was because of the research and preservation of books the Islamic empire was committed to. The mongols set the world back at least 5 decades by burning the Baghdad library
>>879883
They west lost all the battles in the first invasions, but the Mongols hadn't taken any forts and their horses had nothing to eat, so they left. The second invasion went far worse, though, for the Mongols. I'm not saying they couldn't have eventually occupied the entirety of Europe, but it would've taken a lot more effort than they gave. And circumstances changed.
composit bow and strog bread of horses.. oh and apples too. Apples come from Mongolia
>tfw Dan reads those account from Islamic historians when they were getting rolled by the Mongols
>that utter despair
When I was younger I used to think the Mongols were the coolest ancient civ, but now that I'm older they disgust me in every way.
Judging from what Western Europeans could muster up for Crusades, not much.
Judging from the results, nothing was in that library to have helped Abbasids from Mongols. The real knowledge was with the Mongols. And knowledge always wins.
>>879944
That was pretty harrowing, especially since he had just told us about the amazing system of scholars and learning they had where they'd send people to each city to learn more philosophy and science
Then the Mongols came and burned it all to the ground and destroyed the entire institution and learning
I mean I'm glad they did, since otherwise Europe might not have become the dominant global power it did.
You still have to admire their strength, even if they were brutish and destructive.
Historical arsonists, anon.
Fortresses = sitting ducks. Cut supply lines, catapult rotten corpses all day, all night. You're basically toast.
Everything in Europe was assbackwards back then. Armored-Knights = no mobility = mowed down by Mongols arrows easily.
>>879899
Apples are from Kazakhstan m8
Kazakhs are nothing but Mongol-led people who unfortunately were islamicized.
Founders of Kazakhstan were Genghisids. Every prominent and notable leader of Kazakhstan is a Genghisid.
>>879494
>Shit's practically a mounted Napoleonic infantry line formation
thanks for admitting you know nothing about Napoleonic Infantry formations. Nice to know Mongolaboos are retarded in all facets of history/knowledge
You just mad your people were cucks while Mongols enjoyed the top beauties of the world for centuries.
>>879382
stop baiting
Then refute me if you can. You probably just can't handle the cognitive dissonance in your head right now.
They are all squinty eyed small dick fukers anyways. GO USA
oops
the dick chart says otherwise
Oops. USA founded by pussies
>>876966
Sigh. So close to wiping out the religion of peace. So very close. Special thanks to the Pope for not sealing the deal when he had the chance.
>that one mongolaboo who doesn't know how to reply
it's kinda funny and allows me to easily ignore anything he says
>>879975
>Fortresses = sitting ducks. Cut supply lines, catapult rotten corpses all day, all night. You're basically toast.
The mongols themselves told about how much problems they have with stone castles. (in a letter one wrote, something along the lines of "it was mud, not stone, so we didnt have any problems)
Unlike in China where real castles were far apart castles in europe were often seperated by a days ride and no more. Its hard to siege when you have several castles able to ride into you back.
>Everything in Europe was assbackwards back then. Armored-Knights = no mobility = mowed down by Mongols arrows easily.
Again. The mongols themselves were impressed with the Knights, their horses and their horsemanship. The mongols didnt 'mow them down' they were forced separate them into smaller groups, lure them into ambushes etc. because Knights armour was virtually impenetrable, the Knights were much better fighters.
Mongols got their shit torn up when they went hoove to hoove with the knights.
>>879494
more like 30 Years war infantry formations. Or 1500's Pistolier Caracoles.
Nothing like Napoleonic infantry though.
>>880928
>wiping out the religion
Mongols were really i mean really secular.
>>881140
Every decent city in China was stone-walled and the population density in China was higher than in Europe.
Mongol bows were as powerful as english longbows, which could usually penetrate 14th-15th century armor. Also,in the 13th century (Mongol age), I doubt "Knights" had armor that was impenetrable.
>>881165
No they werent. Not in the slightest. The mongols were tolerant relatively speaking but they were in no way secular. They were deeply religious and based their laws, rules, taxes on their beliefs.
>>881187
>Mongol bows were as powerful as english longbows
wrong.
>which could usually penetrate 14th-15th century armor
even more wrong
>I doubt "Knights" had armor that was impenetrable
not all, but some.
at least post a single source
>>881187
>Every decent city in China was stone-walled and the population density in China was higher than in Europe.
Chinese had big stone walled cities with 10000s of inhabitants but the the vast majority had rammed earth. In europe even the smallest town had a stone wall.
Also your second point is just wrong.
>>879975
>armored knights
>no mobility
>>881140
Mongols were crossing their fingers and hoping that the turtle would leave its shell, come out and fight them. If a day away castle sent a contingent, that was like Christmas to Mongols. In reality, with supply and communication lines cut, these nearby castles could hardly know when to sent or when to hunker down. Sending away few remaining knights into an already lost cause could spell doom to your own castle. It wasn't like they had a walkie talkie. A duke worried about its own castle first.
Recorded max range of Mongol bow 536m. Recorded max range of Long bow 328m. Mongols bow were far more powerful than anything Europeans had known. It could easily penetrate a European knight's armor.
>>876966
The hell is going on in OP's pic?
Is this a stealth hyperwar thread?
>>880738
Is this erect
Mongols are not Turks. Turks ran over the West after they got pushed out by Mongols.
Mongols have victories over Teutonics, Templars, and Hospitallers. Every kind of European knight had his shit pushed in by Mongols.
Knights quickly died out thereafter, replaced by Hussars and other forms of light cavalry modeled after Mongols.
>>879016
not really, only Khwarezm and other dissenting regions were sacked wholescale, but otherwise many local rulers joined the Mongols willingly so they avoided the slaughter
even then, the cities that were destroyed during the Mongol conquests i.e. Urgench, Bukhara were bustling cities by the 1300s, it wasn't just a complete annihilation of the region which everyone seems to be happy to repeat
Bump.
Also, i would like to mention mongols held western europe in very small regard, not only because he considered the local kingdoms of the era to be comparatively weak and poor, but also because the lack of plains and pasture would be very detrimental to a force solely composed of cavalry. Talk about a logistical nightmare.
That line of tought apparently passed on to Kublai Kahn, who also held no interest on a large-scale european invasion, even going so far as to accept Marco Polo as a diplomat out of good will.
>>879975
See first and second invasion of Hungary. Knights weren't mowed down, they were a counter to the Mongols, the fast, light and "mobile" Hungarian and Polish cavalry got mowed down, not the heavy knights.
>>879007
>Mongols were just poor peaceful innocent victims to da ebil muslims
I don't want to give of the steriotype that /his/ is easily triggered, but this is the apex of shitposting on an historical board.
>>883643
The Mongols absolutely destroyed the Knights at the Battle of Legnica
13th century poverty Europe, didn't interest Mongols. In fact, what interested Europeans was the East.
European metallurgy didn't catch up to Chinese even until 15th century. Europe had weak weapons and even weaker men. There was absolutely nothing of value in Europe. Starting from the Greeks, the Europeans had always set their hungry eyes upon Asia. Alexander moved East, not west. Rome moved East, not west. Crusaders robbed the East, not west. There was nothing in the west.
North of Mongol heartland is the vast and dense Siberian forests. Genghis himself was born not far from a forested mountain, Burkhan Khaldun. Time and time again, Mongols had subjugated forest people. Europe is much milder and temperate compared to Siberia. It would have caused no challenge at all to Mongols.
>>883953
From the wiki it doesn't seem many knights were engaged in that battle either.
"MaroĊ's total includes 250 knights from Silesia, 36 Templar knights, ten knights from Lesser and Greater Poland, 10 'guest' knights, "
And still, the templars lost only 3 men. At Mohl, they nearly broke the Mongol line, and by the time of the second invasion, the Hungarians had managed to field even more knights and finally kept the Mongols in check.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Mongol_invasion_of_Hungary
>>884027
>European metallurgy didn't catch up to Chinese even until 15th century
I'm pretty sure if there was one field where the Europeans were more advanced than the Chinese (and other East Asian civs) that would be metallurgy. Feel free to correct me with a citation though.
Oh and Rome moved in every direction around the Med. Commerce moved Eastward naturally as there was litteraly half a landmass of exotic goods to commerce with.
>>884027
>Rome moved towards further land, not towards the impassable ocean
No fucking shit you turd.
>>878746
What tiny horses.
>>876990
>we wuz Mongols
>>880738
Fucking based Magyars
what the hell
>>885297
It depends on what kind of metallurgy you
re talking about.
China had pig iron and blast furnaces before Euro based on cursory research on the Roman era, but I can't say shit about the late Middle Ages.
>>885297
Nope. Chinese metallurgy was centuries ahead of Europe's. Every nice thing Europe had, it stole from the East: gunpowder, paper, printing press... Can you believe now their descendants have the honest gall to accuse of Asians of "intellectual property theft?"
>>886016
Bigger: fatter, slow, poor endurance, overall shitty no good for nothing horse.
>>887350
Yes, because general ideas making their way from one part of the world to another part isn't fucking comparable to stealing specific schematics from specific individuals and organizations and then using them to undercut those very individuals. Also, no present politics on /his/.
>>887350
Since I'm not a butthurt Chinese nationalist, I don't really care.
>>886016
European warhorses had to have their diet supplemented by oats. Mongol horses are far better at (read: actually capable of) living off the land.
>>886343
That is fucking moronic. Genghis Khan's foster father was a Christian along with his entire tribe. Kublai Khan's mother was a Christian. There were so many Christians in central Asia that Kublai had to create a separate ministry to govern them. One monk from Karakorum made a pilgrimage to Jerusalem during Kublai's reign, then went to Rome, where he celebrated a mass alongside the pope.
>>882337
Sources you nigger
>>887413
source?
>>887434
Temujin's foster father was Toghrul Wang-Khan, but he doesn't have his own article on wiki.
As for the rest:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sorghaghtani_Beki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rabban_Bar_Sauma
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_among_the_Mongols
Also, Christian general Kitbuqa commanded the forces that invaded Levant in 1260s, but were later defeated by the Mamluks. His entry into Damascus along with his allies, Hethoum of Cilician Armenia and Bohemond of Antioch was described as a joint triumph of three Christian generals.
The European Knight did in fact pose serious problems to the Mongol Horse Archers. The Mongols though employed superior eastern strategy and was able to destroy most Knight armies they faced though.
It's not surprising though that they would have problems, Europe is filled with places that are tough for horses to travel, the Asians had yet to fight an army of completely armored men, and the skill and horsemanship of knights would probably be on par in terms of ability to ride well and know their horses. Mongols had huge advantage in siege tactics, and took advantage of europeans ass backwards strategies.
It wouldve been a tough battle for the Mongols to go all the way to western europe, but they couldve easily destroyed it if they had continued their conquest.
>>886343
Wow that was beautiful. As a Mongol who left Mongolia, more than a decade ago, I have to say that was surprisingly well put together and thoughtful piece of writing. Thank you for putting that up.
Alpha
>>887900
hudlaa shaaj bgaamaa hugshuun shaal hudlaa l yarij baigaa shuu
yu gej hudlaa shaasiin. unen l yum bichsen bna
