Interesting Historical Fact

[Samurai Joey]

How were the Mongols so militarily successful? I heard they were able to amass a mounted army of 150,000 men. Did Mongolia even have 150,000 men? Also, they fought European knights wearing cumbersome armour armed only with swords whereas the Mongols fired armoured piercing arrows.

To answer your question about the troop numbers, the troops of the Mongol empire that emerged under Genghis Khan did not consist solely of ethnic Mongols but also various different Turkic tribal groups, such as the Uyghurs and Tatars. Part of the fascinating aspects of the history of the empire is that Genghis Khan spent much of his early period battling various clans within the Mongol groups and the Turkic tribes, forging alliances until finally he was acknowledged as the leader of a united federation of all Mongols and Turkic tribes.

You are correct also that the Mongols fired armoured piercing arrows, but their primarily strength was their use of arrows on horseback, and the resultant speed from which they could conqueror vast ranges of territory.

Another interesting aspect of Genghis Khan, apart from the more ruthless aspects, was his relative religious tolerance: he had decreed religious freedom in lands under his control and supported domestic and international trade. Thus various Muslim, Christian and Buddhist groups had joined him before his foreign conquests.

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

Incidentally, a while back I saw a film which I really enjoyed called Mongol, directed by Russian director Sergei Bodrov (or part Mongol ancestry, in fact) which chronicles the early years of the rise of Temujin, who eventually becomes Genghis Khan.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0416044/

 

[Chimpanzeethat]

For a different perspective of Genghis Khan, pickup the book G.K. and the making of the modern world. Good read.

 

[Rockslinger]

It is amazing how many small city states and countries can amass such larger empires (Macedonia, Rome, Mongolia, England, even Spain and France, etc.). Apparently, Alex the Great never had an army larger than 20,000 men (and 3 women).

 

[danmand]

To answer your question about the troop numbers, the troops of the Mongol empire that emerged under Genghis Khan did not consist solely of ethnic Mongols but also various different Turkic tribal groups, such as the Uyghurs and Tatars. Part of the fascinating aspects of the history of the empire is that Genghis Khan spent much of his early period battling various clans within the Mongol groups and the Turkic tribes, forging alliances until finally he was acknowledged as the leader of a united federation of all Mongols and Turkic tribes.

You are correct also that the Mongols fired armoured piercing arrows, but their primarily strength was their use of arrows on horseback, and the resultant speed from which they could conqueror vast ranges of territory.

Another interesting aspect of Genghis Khan, apart from the more ruthless aspects, was his relative religious tolerance: he had decreed religious freedom in lands under his control and supported domestic and international trade. Thus various Muslim, Christian and Buddhist groups had joined him before his foreign conquests.

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

Incidentally, a while back I saw a film which I really enjoyed called Mongol, directed by Russian director Sergei Bodrov (or part Mongol ancestry, in fact) which chronicles the early years of the rise of Temujin, who eventually becomes Genghis Khan.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0416044/

Ghengis Khan's capital Karakorum was organized into 4 quadrants, one for muslims, one for buddists, one for the royalty etc.

Ghengis Khan also invented the pony express to keep in communication with the vast area.

 

[Aardvark154]

Incidentally, a while back I saw a film which I really enjoyed called Mongol, directed by Russian director Sergei Bodrov (or part Mongol ancestry, in fact)

As I'm sure you know, there is pervasive Mongol and Tartar ancestry in Russia.

 

[Rockslinger]

Ghengis Khan's capital Karakorum was organized into 4 quadrants, one for muslims, one for buddists, one for the royalty etc.

Ghengis always said the Muslim quadrant was the most troublesome one. Always whinning about something then blowing things up when they didn't get their way. They really pissed off the Buddhists when they blew up the Budda statutes.

 

[Ceiling Cat]

You are correct also that the Mongols fired armoured piercing arrows, but their primarily strength was their use of arrows on horseback, and the resultant speed from which they could conqueror vast ranges of territory.

On the matter of armor piercing arrows, If their arrows are anything like the simple arrows you can get at Canadian Tire these days that would be all they need. I know a family that owns a actual suit of armor, the metal is thinner than what you would find on a car fender today. The arrows that were not armor piercing were probably flint tipped and the ones the could pierce armor were forged metal tips.

Long before Ghengis Khan, there was Attila the Hun. There are several theories of what his origins were. Some say the Huns originated from Northern China. So there could have been many invasions by peoples of oriental origins into Western Europe

 

[blackrock13]

On the matter of armor piercing arrows, If their arrows are anything like the simple arrows you can get at Canadian Tire these days that would be all they need. I know a family that owns a actual suit of armor, the metal is thinner than what you would find on a car fender today. The arrows that were not armor piercing were probably flint tipped and the ones the could pierce armor were forged metal tips.

Long before Ghengis Khan, there was Attila the Hun. There are several theories of what his origins were. Some say the Huns originated from Northern China. So there could have been many invasions by peoples of oriental origins into Western Europe

The most successful arrow design during the high water mark of the English long bowman were tipped with a bodkin point, but even they bounced off the Milanese 'steel' armour of the Lombard mercenaries in the French Army. The English were introduced to the armour during the Battles of Verneil (1424) and Patay (1429). The tightly fitted smoothly curved surfaces gave no flush surface for the arrow to easily hit directly. Luckily the charges broke through, but failed to rally and continued on towards the baggage train away from the main battle, or the impact could have been something else.

A full suit of plate armour weighs form as little 40 lbs to 100+ lbs, the heaviest belonging to tournament armour and a thickness of ~14 -18 gauge, thicker on the more more vulnerable left side. Some very effective armour against arrows was made from simple layered bonded paper scales developed in China in the 9th century CE.

 

[Samurai Joey]

As I'm sure you know, there is pervasive Mongol and Tartar ancestry in Russia.

Indeed I am. In fact, there are at least 3 distinct ethnic groups of Mongol and Tatar ancestry in modern day Russia:

(1) The Buryats, a Mongol ethnic group living in parts of Siberia, who traditionally were nomadic herding people like other Mongols; largely followers of Tibetan Buddhism

(2) The Kalmyks, descended from western Mongols who had migrated to the European part of Russia, near the Caspian Sea, during the 17th century; also largely followers of Tibetan Buddhism (the only inhabitants on the European continent whose national religion is Buddhism)

(3) The aforementioned Tatars, descended from the original Mongol and Tatar groups who accompanied Genghis Khan, intermarried with the various ethnic groups, and converted to Sunni Islam.

Of course, there are many ethnic Russians who may themselves have part Mongol and Tatar ancestry.

 

[red]

Not one of the largest empires in history... it was the largest empire that has existed in human history

depends how you look at it

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

 

[elmo]

The moral of this story is, that all imperial conquests, from Genghis Khan, Alexander, The Romans, the spanish in South America, the british in Africa and India, the Japanese in Korea, the Nazi's, the americans in the middle east, etc etc. , have been justified by the desire to spread civilization, peace and democracy to other people.

Actually the were all motivated by greed and some form of financial gain.

 

[GPIDEAL]

Which was the longest?

From one Google source about the Roman Empire:

Depending on how you define the Roman Empire:

•The united empire lasted 426 years
•The Western Empire lasted a further 81 years, for a total of 507 years
•The Eastern Empire lasted a further 1058 years after the split, for a total of 1484 years.

 

[Aardvark154]

Of course, there are many ethnic Russians may themselves have part Mongol and Tatar ancestry.

Besides of course the Tartars who remain a major ethnic group. I was referencing the fact that almost all ethnic Great Russians have distant Tartar/Mongol ancestry.

 

[rld]

Which was the longest?

From one Google source about the Roman Empire:

Depending on how you define the Roman Empire:

•The united empire lasted 426 years
•The Western Empire lasted a further 81 years, for a total of 507 years
•The Eastern Empire lasted a further 1058 years after the split, for a total of 1484 years.

It really depends on things like how you define "empire", the eastern empire was not much of an empire for many of those years.

And in may calculations the Holy Roman Empire gets short shrift...but lasted for a solid 844 years, and if you add in the Austro-Hungarian empire as a successor that would push it another 112 years or so. And for size, if you look at the period of time when the Spanish crown was Habsburg, that might well be the largest empire in the world as well.

 

[5hummer]

So, I guess we can summarize that all leaders of great empires have raped and pillaged in the name of their 'god' or 'leader'?

 

[rld]

So, I guess we can summarize that all leaders of great empires have raped and pillaged in the name of their 'god' or 'leader'?

No. I would say...most but not all. And some empires had little to do with "god" or "leader" but were about nation or people. Like Hitler's "volk" for instance.

 

[IM469]

Actually the were all motivated by greed and some form of financial gain.

But number one motivator is... Pussy !

 

[Samurai Joey]

Just as a follow-up to the original post about Genghis Khan, here is an interesting article in the Economist, in which two geophysicists have analyzed tree-ring data which seems to suggest that during the period between years 1208 to 1231 the area which is now modern day Mongolia enjoyed a string of wetter-than-usual which was longer than any other such period in the past millennium (and previous tree-ring data suggested that the same period was also unusually warm).

What this would mean is that these climatic conditions would have provided richer grazing for the nomadic Mongols' herds than usual, thus more horses and thus greater ammunition to conquer vast territories. And therefore, climate change may have played a role in the rise of the Mongol Empire.

http://www.economist.com/news/scien...-was-probably-encouraged-climate-change-horde

 

[Rockslinger]

And therefore, climate change may have played a role in the rise of the Mongol Empire.

But, did climate change produced 150,000 Mongol horse soldiers and infected them with such viciousness? The Mongols were probably the most vicious and brutal people in the history of mankind (the Danes are a close second).

 

[Petzel]

Another episode tonight.......about the Aztecs, Constantinople, and the discovery of the new world!