Reading the correspondence between the Pope and Khan is hilarious due to their letters one-note nature. The Pope imploring the Mongols to accept Christ lest their eternal souls burn in hellfire, and the Khan demanding the usual tribute and subservience lest they be destroyed. It's no Abelard and Eloise!
It is said that during subotais and jebes conquest of Russia and was pursued by multiple armies and even outnumbered 5/1, subotais genius kicked into gear and was able to seperate the 4 armies and destroy them using defeat in detail tactics. Keep in mind they were always outnumbered in their Russian expeditions. Not many generals before or after subotai could have made it out of their alive.
OMG for the last time, bows could not penetrate heavy armor. The Mongol composite bow was 25% more efficient in converting draw weight (potential energy) into arrow power (kinetic energy), but this was counteracted by them usually being used by horse archers, thus smaller than foot bows.
I agree. Heavy cavalry, with plate and mail layered with other materials, were not going to be penetrated by arrows in any place that was debilitating much less lethal
This is the early- to mid 13th century, we're talking about. There was no plate armor - it was all mail. Mail is great armor, very versatile, but it doesn't stand up particularly well to war bows. I have participated in armor tests with relatively low draw weight bows (around 60 pounds) and they punch right through riveted mail and padding at shorter distances. The rings of mail armor at the time were almost universally made of iron, not steel, and were far more prone to breaking rather than bending. All it takes for an arrow to go through is a single ring failing, so mail is really not the best option against Mongol archers.
Samarkant is actually several thousand of years older than Temur, was one of Alexander the Great's Alexandrias. A settlement that probably was renamed by Alexander after he conquered it.
@@rockstar450 Not even remotely comparable. Mongols gave everyone a very simple choice: Submit/pay tribute or be treated as an enemy and face destruction. If you were Jewish, Slavic, gay or disabled and you were in Nazi occupied land you were going to die no questions asked civilian or not. Death counters aren't the be-all-end-all of comparing which civilization was worse than the other.
@@Yrkr785 The Nazis were the exact same - subit to Nazi rule and you're cool so long as you were racially compatible. Both were dispicable. Also. Mongols wiped out communities who also surrendered. They only SPARED the cities they could extort tribute out of for that reason. It was exploitation with far less freedom than 20th Century Germany.
@@Nihoolious The majority of where they touched was worse due to their intervention. Despite Mongol genes everywhere due to their prolific r*pe, where is the culture? WHERE? It was cast off in disgust by all. Compare to Greek and Roman conquests and it's night and day. The authoritarian roots of Riassia are the only external legacy of their oppression and you've ignored the entire civilisations they wiped out. Just because they spared extorted cities doesnt make them noble. See my other comment.
Not completely sure but I think both the British Empire and the Russian Empire at its greatest extent were larger than the Mongol Empire but the Mongol one was definitely the largest contiguous empire -i.e. one not interrupted by sea.Russian Empire at its largest included Alaska,Finland and Poland.
OMG an actor shot an entire movie on a nuclear weapon testing site which was radioactive, and caused more than half the production crew to get radioactivity-induced cancer and die, including John Wayne himself!
@john son sorry mate ...we English had the longbow ...the most powerful bow ever made and fired the heaviest arrow and so we would of out ranged those cavalry archers .......also the topography of Europe particularly the Alps areas are made for bottle neck battles of Attrition and are no places for massed horse archers !!
So I think the fanfare for the Mongols and their extraordinary achievements is warranted insofar as their feats being impressive. However, I do have to take issue with the tacit implication that they ever really came into contact with "Knights" or fortifications of the sort that was characteristic of central and western European warfare in their excursions in Georgia and Hungary. When we look at the armies of Poland and Hungary we really see armies comprised of light cavalry and spear men and considerably less reliant on heavy cavalry and infantry. It was this mobility that would allow them to defeat the Teutonic order in the 1400s for example. That isn't to say that Central and Western Europe were uniquely able to defend against the Khans as we may never know since infighting, faction, and stagnation had afflicted them quite badly by the 1280s during their second incursion into Hungary under Nogai Khan where they were largely unable to threaten Hungarian fortresses having not brought any real siege equipment. This however, is one of history's great what ifs, a historical manifestation of the "unstoppable force vs. immovable object" paradox.
As stated in the video and historical research they were even more effective agains heavy infantry and cavalry. They had also massive siege weaopns based on chinese technology with whom they conquered almost every fortified city. From what I have read, their interest in western europe was very low, since at that time all the worlds wealth, wisdom and technology came from Asia. The people of the steppes and also from the Orient were basically not really interested in Western and North Europe since these regions were poor and sparsely populated places in comparison to the middle East and Asia.
All the medieval sources at the time of people who have met the mongols disagree with you. Heavy knights are the exact opposite of what you want because they are easily susceptible to feigned retreats which the mongols are literally known for. Take for example the invasion of Georgia, the Georgians had amassed a massive number of heavy knights that easily rivaled Subutai's reconnaissance force and when the mongols came their horses couldn't catch them and they quickly tired out due to the heavy weight at which the mongols turned around and easily finished them off.
Dan Carlin's Wrath of Khan was available here on youtube but no longer. I really like his style of story telling. Does anyone know where to listen to the podcasts nowaday?
I don't like how they did the Romanoi dirty though. They're partially to blame for their downfall (like 20% by kicking them while they were down). The Romans, byzantines, did it to themselves but the Latins in Venice absolutely helped.
The mongols at that time were very diverse people, we can assume that Genghis Khan was Mongol/Turkic since historians estimate that most of his warriors were Turks. The great Mongol, Turkish and Iranian steppes tribes intermixed with each other for centuries forming a very diverse looking people from East to West some looking more Turkish like Tatars, Turks in Turkey and Azerbaijan and some more Mongolic like todays Kazakh or Uyghur.
Everybody: The Mongols are coming, take cover, we all gonna die !!! Greeks (eastern Romans): May we present you our new partners, the Mongols !!! The Mongols also finished the abassid khalifate (not only the Turks), cause of partnership with the Greeks...
Can you, please, check your maps. You have put Greece, where in fact that is BULGARIA, and never was conquered by the Mongols(not talking about Volga Bulgars, that held the Mongols for 13 years)
Some sources give a short account of the battle of Samara Bend, which was fought after Kalka and in which Volga Bulgars destroyed Mongol army. Modern historiography considers this account apocryphal, as there is evidence that Subutai forced many tribes between Desht-i Kipchak and Mongolia to become tributaries, which would not be possible if he was defeated so soundly
As I understand it (always subject to change, of course) it was the Disease Barrier that the Mongols failed to cross, not any political entity amassing armies in opposition. It is in the historic record that contact with western society wiped out indigenous peoples everywhere trade-and war- went. Plagues, STDs, awful hygiene . . . like other invasive species, our movements over the land and sea carry disease to foreign soils. By way of example, Google "Tenochtitlan" and read about its fate, once Spanish invaders brought "civilization" to the "New" world. Sure, indigenies have disease, too, but the ancient western habit of cramming together of populations along with carrier species, like rats and ticks, in cities, causes an escalated biological warfare environment from which the most pernicious and virulent types issue whenever war-or trade-is available. Moreover, when a population encounters a new bacterial or virus pest it loses all brackets of age groups, including breeding age females. Only generations of adaptation and antibody transfer reduce its ferocity to that of, say, the modern "common" cold, which only kills the very young, very old, or those with damaged immune systems. It was not western mastery of tactics, technology, or arms, that halted the Mongol advance into Africa and Europe. It was the Clap.
Valid point but here is my counter argument. If it was indeed because of STD, then answer me pls, how come Genghis Khan's genes can be found in nearly 0.5% of the entire population of the world, if your case were to be true, then it simply can't explain how they were able to spread their genes so much around the globe. But yes, diseases did play a major role, for example, when a city was besieged successfully, the population would die of disease and/or starvation if they did not surrender.
I think you have it backwards. American tribes fell to disease because they had no livestock besides a few llamas in the mountains, and livestock/human co-mingling were the originator of smallpox, etc. I'm also pretty sure that the Mongols brought the bubonic plague to Europe, precipitating the black death in the 1300s.
@@ParikshitBhujbal I don't exactly buy this theory but the "Genghis Khan's genes" thing could still spread despite any lack of immunity of the original Asian steppe population because they were the result of continuous outbreeding with local populations and not strict endogamy. After a few generations of outbreeding the original steppe DNA component becomes negligible. You should look up y chromosomal adam and mitochondrial eve.
Ghenghis Khan is Mongolian and always on horseback. Most Chinese in China at that time were farmers. Only his sons and grandsons were connected with Chinese history.
Yup, that is the Duke. The 1960's had very different ideas about what costumes and makeup were acceptable. The movie itself is awful and it presents the conflict between Temujin and Jamuga as just a big misunderstanding between friends. It is the only movie that has ever literally put me to sleep.
It's still not good these days. The History Channel show "Vikings" shows 9th century Anglo-Saxons donning lamellar armor and Renaissance-era helmets. Don't even get me started on how the Vikings look like gay biker fetishists.
You're wrong about Poland and Hungary as Poland and Hungary did put up a Fight against the Mongols to where the Battle could've gone either way. Mongol Arrows were NOT capable of penetrating heavy Army which is why the Polish and Hungarians adopted heavy Armored Troops for the second Mongol Invasion which ended in Hungarian and Polish Victories halting the Mongol advance.
Reading the correspondence between the Pope and Khan is hilarious due to their letters one-note nature. The Pope imploring the Mongols to accept Christ lest their eternal souls burn in hellfire, and the Khan demanding the usual tribute and subservience lest they be destroyed. It's no Abelard and Eloise!
John Wayne as Gengis Khan shot in Arizona...just awesome
That is why it was a disaster of a movie.
@john son that's because the desert was used for testing nuclear weapons you moron
@@cv4809 Why didn't they use Montana? It has grasslands
*He did all of those because he is Genghis Khan, not Genghis Khan’t*
(－‸ლ)
You know he just had that Khan-do attitude
You think you’re funny but really, shut up.
Vasily Krushev *Not gonna take that from someone who likes sucking on toes*
Nice
It is said that during subotais and jebes conquest of Russia and was pursued by multiple armies and even outnumbered 5/1, subotais genius kicked into gear and was able to seperate the 4 armies and destroy them using defeat in detail tactics. Keep in mind they were always outnumbered in their Russian expeditions. Not many generals before or after subotai could have made it out of their alive.
"and then Timur ruined their day" kind of sums up any discussion of Timur tbh
OMG for the last time, bows could not penetrate heavy armor. The Mongol composite bow was 25% more efficient in converting draw weight (potential energy) into arrow power (kinetic energy), but this was counteracted by them usually being used by horse archers, thus smaller than foot bows.
I agree. Heavy cavalry, with plate and mail layered with other materials, were not going to be penetrated by arrows in any place that was debilitating much less lethal
Yep it's laughable that people still believe that to be plausible
I find it hilarious that you reacted like a teenager and said "OMG" lol
@@Pacmon0 that sounds slightly dirty
This is the early- to mid 13th century, we're talking about. There was no plate armor - it was all mail. Mail is great armor, very versatile, but it doesn't stand up particularly well to war bows. I have participated in armor tests with relatively low draw weight bows (around 60 pounds) and they punch right through riveted mail and padding at shorter distances. The rings of mail armor at the time were almost universally made of iron, not steel, and were far more prone to breaking rather than bending. All it takes for an arrow to go through is a single ring failing, so mail is really not the best option against Mongol archers.
Samarkant is actually several thousand of years older than Temur, was one of Alexander the Great's Alexandrias. A settlement that probably was renamed by Alexander after he conquered it.
Lostintime Merecanda became Samarkand
One of my new favourite channels, I look forward to droning through all your videos
Every historian loves the mongols!!!
I think they’re on par with the nazis
@@rockstar450 Mongols were way more than reasonable unlike the nazis just accept Mongol rule and you’re cool
@@rockstar450 Not even remotely comparable. Mongols gave everyone a very simple choice: Submit/pay tribute or be treated as an enemy and face destruction. If you were Jewish, Slavic, gay or disabled and you were in Nazi occupied land you were going to die no questions asked civilian or not. Death counters aren't the be-all-end-all of comparing which civilization was worse than the other.
@@Yrkr785 The Nazis were the exact same - subit to Nazi rule and you're cool so long as you were racially compatible. Both were dispicable. Also. Mongols wiped out communities who also surrendered. They only SPARED the cities they could extort tribute out of for that reason. It was exploitation with far less freedom than 20th Century Germany.
@@Nihoolious The majority of where they touched was worse due to their intervention. Despite Mongol genes everywhere due to their prolific r*pe, where is the culture? WHERE? It was cast off in disgust by all. Compare to Greek and Roman conquests and it's night and day. The authoritarian roots of Riassia are the only external legacy of their oppression and you've ignored the entire civilisations they wiped out. Just because they spared extorted cities doesnt make them noble. See my other comment.
Not completely sure but I think both the British Empire and the Russian Empire at its greatest extent were larger than the Mongol Empire but the Mongol one was definitely the largest contiguous empire -i.e. one not interrupted by sea.Russian Empire at its largest included Alaska,Finland and Poland.
Only the British Empire at its greatest extent was larger than the Mongolian Empire. The Russian was third followed by the Spanish and so on...
Timur the Lame, according to the narrator on Barbarians series said he was a Mongol but not related to Genghis Khan
Yes that’s true
No movie captures the spirit of America better than "The Conqueror." Not the subject matter, but the entire history of the production.
Oh no an actor painted his face brown, the horror!
OMG an actor shot an entire movie on a nuclear weapon testing site which was radioactive, and caused more than half the production crew to get radioactivity-induced cancer and die, including John Wayne himself!
@@LTrotsky21stCentury Sounds like something irrelevant to what I was saying, perhaps you're "deaf" though.
How would the Mongols' bows match up to the English longbow?
I imagine that the Mongol bow would compare pretty favorably to the English longbow, the mobility advantage alone would be huge.
@john son sorry mate ...we English had the longbow ...the most powerful bow ever made and fired the heaviest arrow and so we would of out ranged those cavalry archers .......also the topography of Europe particularly the Alps areas are made for bottle neck battles of Attrition and are no places for massed horse archers !!
@@MegaBaddog Turns out the Jungles of Southern China and the mountains of the Caucasus weren't either.
@@ThersitestheHistorian Longbows do have a much heavier draw weight and range though
Wish you'd use black backgrounds so I could watch at dark. White just too bright late at night so I just listen.
So I think the fanfare for the Mongols and their extraordinary achievements is warranted insofar as their feats being impressive. However, I do have to take issue with the tacit implication that they ever really came into contact with "Knights" or fortifications of the sort that was characteristic of central and western European warfare in their excursions in Georgia and Hungary. When we look at the armies of Poland and Hungary we really see armies comprised of light cavalry and spear men and considerably less reliant on heavy cavalry and infantry. It was this mobility that would allow them to defeat the Teutonic order in the 1400s for example. That isn't to say that Central and Western Europe were uniquely able to defend against the Khans as we may never know since infighting, faction, and stagnation had afflicted them quite badly by the 1280s during their second incursion into Hungary under Nogai Khan where they were largely unable to threaten Hungarian fortresses having not brought any real siege equipment. This however, is one of history's great what ifs, a historical manifestation of the "unstoppable force vs. immovable object" paradox.
As stated in the video and historical research they were even more effective agains heavy infantry and cavalry. They had also massive siege weaopns based on chinese technology with whom they conquered almost every fortified city. From what I have read, their interest in western europe was very low, since at that time all the worlds wealth, wisdom and technology came from Asia. The people of the steppes and also from the Orient were basically not really interested in Western and North Europe since these regions were poor and sparsely populated places in comparison to the middle East and Asia.
All the medieval sources at the time of people who have met the mongols disagree with you. Heavy knights are the exact opposite of what you want because they are easily susceptible to feigned retreats which the mongols are literally known for. Take for example the invasion of Georgia, the Georgians had amassed a massive number of heavy knights that easily rivaled Subutai's reconnaissance force and when the mongols came their horses couldn't catch them and they quickly tired out due to the heavy weight at which the mongols turned around and easily finished them off.
another awesome video ....can't wait for more
This was a great overview.
"Genghis Kahn doesn't do what Genghis Kahn does for Genghis Kahn. Genghis Kahn does what Genghis Kahn does because Genghis Kahn is... Genghis Kahn."
Are there primary sources available in English other than the Secret History of the Mongols?
Not so far as I know.
Dan Carlin's Wrath of Khan was available here on youtube but no longer. I really like his style of story telling. Does anyone know where to listen to the podcasts nowaday?
@@daviddoan68 that's not a primary source
How do you distinguish between German and Teutonic? At times you don't make any sense at all
i love the Venetians all about their money
I don't like how they did the Romanoi dirty though. They're partially to blame for their downfall (like 20% by kicking them while they were down). The Romans, byzantines, did it to themselves but the Latins in Venice absolutely helped.
Interesting. Thanks for posting.
The Mongols were either Oriental or Eurasian but not White
Lol at the brown face offending you. I can tell you’re in academia
The mongols at that time were very diverse people, we can assume that Genghis Khan was Mongol/Turkic since historians estimate that most of his warriors were Turks.
The great Mongol, Turkish and Iranian steppes tribes intermixed with each other for centuries forming a very diverse looking people from East to West some looking more Turkish like Tatars, Turks in Turkey and Azerbaijan and some more Mongolic like todays Kazakh or Uyghur.
Everybody: The Mongols are coming, take cover, we all gonna die !!!
Greeks (eastern Romans): May we present you our new partners, the Mongols !!!
The Mongols also finished the abassid khalifate (not only the Turks), cause of partnership with the Greeks...
John Wayne played Genghis Khan, what a terrible idea
That is very bad
in casting of the movie.
Genghis also had a nephew named Tommy.
Can you, please, check your maps. You have put Greece, where in fact that is BULGARIA, and never was conquered by the Mongols(not talking about Volga Bulgars, that held the Mongols for 13 years)
Some sources give a short account of the battle of Samara Bend, which was fought after Kalka and in which Volga Bulgars destroyed Mongol army. Modern historiography considers this account apocryphal, as there is evidence that Subutai forced many tribes between Desht-i Kipchak and Mongolia to become tributaries, which would not be possible if he was defeated so soundly
17:48 Java (Indonesia), Vietnam, and the Delhi Sultanate also won against the Mongols.
Mongols and Ottomans are the most ineresting states from the medieval era for me
As I understand it (always subject to change, of course) it was the Disease Barrier that the Mongols failed to cross, not any political entity amassing armies in opposition. It is in the historic record that contact with western society wiped out indigenous peoples everywhere trade-and war- went. Plagues, STDs, awful hygiene . . . like other invasive species, our movements over the land and sea carry disease to foreign soils. By way of example, Google "Tenochtitlan" and read about its fate, once Spanish invaders brought "civilization" to the "New" world. Sure, indigenies have disease, too, but the ancient western habit of cramming together of populations along with carrier species, like rats and ticks, in cities, causes an escalated biological warfare environment from which the most pernicious and virulent types issue whenever war-or trade-is available. Moreover, when a population encounters a new bacterial or virus pest it loses all brackets of age groups, including breeding age females. Only generations of adaptation and antibody transfer reduce its ferocity to that of, say, the modern "common" cold, which only kills the very young, very old, or those with damaged immune systems. It was not western mastery of tactics, technology, or arms, that halted the Mongol advance into Africa and Europe.
It was the Clap.
Valid point but here is my counter argument.
If it was indeed because of STD, then answer me pls, how come Genghis Khan's genes can be found in nearly 0.5% of the entire population of the world, if your case were to be true, then it simply can't explain how they were able to spread their genes so much around the globe.
But yes, diseases did play a major role, for example, when a city was besieged successfully, the population would die of disease and/or starvation if they did not surrender.
I think you have it backwards. American tribes fell to disease because they had no livestock besides a few llamas in the mountains, and livestock/human co-mingling were the originator of smallpox, etc. I'm also pretty sure that the Mongols brought the bubonic plague to Europe, precipitating the black death in the 1300s.
@@ParikshitBhujbal I don't exactly buy this theory but the "Genghis Khan's genes" thing could still spread despite any lack of immunity of the original Asian steppe population because they were the result of continuous outbreeding with local populations and not strict endogamy. After a few generations of outbreeding the original steppe DNA component becomes negligible. You should look up y chromosomal adam and mitochondrial eve.
respect from Mongolia, we tying to conquer the world again
@BLUE DOG the HU band is part of another things
@BLUE DOG u need to take a chill pill 😂😂😂😂😂😂
With what? horses and arrows don't work anymore
Albino u miss me
Nice going Genghis
Timur was partially Mongol.
He was mongol his tribe was turkified tho
John Wayne as Genghis Khan 😆 🤣
A very bad casting in the movie production.
Gengis khan mother was tatar .not mongul
china ? it is Jurcheon Jin dynasty !!!!
No.
Ghenghis Khan is
Mongolian and always on horseback. Most
Chinese in China at that time were
farmers. Only his sons and grandsons were connected with Chinese history.
I-is that John Wayne?
Yup, that is the Duke. The 1960's had very different ideas about what costumes and makeup were acceptable. The movie itself is awful and it presents the conflict between Temujin and Jamuga as just a big misunderstanding between friends. It is the only movie that has ever literally put me to sleep.
It's still not good these days. The History Channel show "Vikings" shows 9th century Anglo-Saxons donning lamellar armor and Renaissance-era helmets. Don't even get me started on how the Vikings look like gay biker fetishists.
@@ThersitestheHistorian 50s*
The vietnamese also beat the mongols
🤣
bad video lots of half baked facts and misinformation
Like?
You're wrong about Poland and Hungary as Poland and Hungary did put up a Fight against the Mongols to where the Battle could've gone either way. Mongol Arrows were NOT capable of penetrating heavy Army which is why the Polish and Hungarians adopted heavy Armored Troops for the second Mongol Invasion which ended in Hungarian and Polish Victories halting the Mongol advance.