Why do people only ever talk about Genghis when discussing Mongol history?

Why do people only ever talk about Genghis when discussing Mongol history?

Why are the other Khans always forgotten or overshadowed by Genghis?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Europe#Invasion_into_Central_Europe
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Bassianae
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Catalaunian_Plains
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subutai
books.google.de/books?id=WVu1CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA46&lpg=PA46&dq=siege of kiev wooden walls&source=bl&ots=61dFfqMSNB&sig=Gd1XmVk3IJKp53Z-TwMsKw8h7Dc&hl=de&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiSpan2jcbNAhWBIpoKHTcDDjQQ6AEIPjAE#v=onepage&q=siege of kiev wooden walls&f=false
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenceslaus_I_of_Bohemia
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Mongol_invasion_of_Hungary
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Mongols are literally one hit wonder: the People.

They were a significant geopolitical force from the their ethnogenesis up until the invention of accurate muzzle-loading rifles.

>a significant geopolitical force

You mean defeated by anyone that wasn't a retard or weak, see Mamlukes and Hungary after they built some more castles.

>I'm an idiot

kubilai

>Persians were idiots/weak
>Chinese were idiots/weak

Uh...

They were literally nothing After the Mongol Empire and the fall of its successor states.

The only great victory they managed after that was the Tumu Crisis, which only happened after the Ming Emperor received continuous idiot advice. And they still failed to invade Ming China.

They never got a break in the 16th Century and afterwards, and the Qing finally ended them in the 1700's.

>Chinese were idiots/weak

They were divided into 3 states that were at war with eachother. It's not like the mongols stormed a united China with all of it under the control of a ruler, they just allied with the Song to take the Jin out and the Song had many more soldiers then the mongols.
They weren't idiots? Yes they were: they were constrantly recalling their best generals back of the fear that the generals would start an uprising.


>Persians were idiots/weak
Again - not united and at war with eachother: The Khwarezmians against the Abbasids.
The Khwarezmian Empire was very sparsely populated in comparison to European countries. The Caliph was an idiot that led a failed expansion against Baghdad where thousands of his own soldiers died before even reaching the target. And after that he also failed to organize his armies to defend against the mongols.
About the Abbasids - their glory days were long over, the empire started declining many hundred years before the mongols.


Ever wondered why they couldn't even conquer Poland and Hungary? The two weakest countries in western Europe.
Because these countries were in much better shape in anything the mongols faced.

Why do people only ever talk about Hannibal when discussing carthaginian history? Why do people only ever talk about Attila when discussing hun history?

Caliph Pavel, I'm Ilkhanate.

>Ever wondered why they couldn't even conquer Poland and Hungary? The two weakest countries in western Europe. Because these countries were in much better shape in anything the mongols faced.

No it's more like Europe was a piss poor region that wasn't worth the time and effort to conquer. The Mongols constantly bitched and moaned about the lack of loot from the Polish and Hungarian cities they sacked. Hell Kievan Rus was more important to the Mongols because unlike the European countries they invaded it actually had economic value.

>Hell Kievan Rus was more important to the Mongols because unlike the European countries they invaded it actually had economic value.

I guarrantee you that atleast Hungary, the HRE and France are many more times richer then the Kievan Rus- in which soldiers couldn't even afford protective armor like Mail to defend to defend against the invaders. And where castles were made out of wood instead of stone.

>The Mongols constantly bitched and moaned about the lack of loot from the Polish and Hungarian cities they sacked
Citation needed.
The Mongols couldn't succeed in Hungary because though it's true that they were able to occupy a sizeable part of the Hungarian kingdom, they couldn't properly supply their troops, plus albeit they won most of their battles, their armies suffered considerable losses in manpower both in larger battles like Legnice or Mohi, and in smaller ones too (since they couldn't siege a lot of castles, the garrisons there were able to lead skirmishes against the Mongol armies). So both the losses, the constant harassment and the lack of proper supplies were the cause of their withdrawal. In addition the once defeated Russians started reorganizing resistances basically behind their backs, so the Mongols realized that though they got lucky with the Poles and Hungarians one time, they shouldn't push their luck further and simply must fuck off.

>Subutai with 1000 men vs 60,000 Poles and Hungarians
>Mongols suffered minimal losses
>Poles and Hungarians lost 40,000

Only the death of Ögedei Khan save EU from looking like Finland.

*edit
>30k Mongols vs 80k Europeans
>1k mongol deaths
>40k europeans

Sorry, it's been awhile since I took my last ancient history course but Ögedei Khan's death is what really save europe not european military strengh

Where did you get this horseshit from? At least look up your info before you post bullshit like this.

That's stupid. Different styles of warfare calls for different styles of armor, that's like saying that European armors are shit because they didn't use Lamellar like the Chinese and Japanese.

>I guarrantee you that atleast Hungary, the HRE and France are many more times richer then the Kievan Rus

Wrong, Kievan Rus was a major trade zone that connected trade routes from the Baltic, the Black Sea and Central Asia. Their armies were well-equipped if not better than most kingdoms in Europe.

Ringmar, E. (2017). The Mongol khanates. In History of International Relations

You basically confirmed what I've said. The poorness of Europe compared to other regions of Eurasia is well known, and all the troubles that the Mongols were encountering in their campaign for little to no gain was the motivation for not continuing further into the continent. Why try to mug a beggar who will fight tooth and nail for his one coin when there are richer men with larger purses who will put up less of a struggle?

because Genghis wasn't the one to get absolutely rekt by Based Baibars

Explain

Hulegu wasn't either t.b.h.

>send scouting party to Europe
>completely destroy armies 2-4x your size
>ögedei gets heemd
>europe conquest is no more

No it fucking wasn't you retard.

I'd like to see the Mongols getting through all those forests and mountanous areas in mid winter while the mad Europeans scorch the earth

It's all speculative but destroying everything they came across in Europe thus far with a tiny scouting party while successfully invading Russia during winter makes it look like they at the very least stood a good chance.

Most of Russia was a scarcely populated plain.

Most of Europe wasn't.

Mongol dicksucking is the worst meme pop historians have inflicted on us

>dicksucking

Far from, but you're denying that the fact that the mongols didn't try to conquer Europe was somehow because Europe was strong, false. Europe was at war with each other at the time which made it even more unstable.

Ögedei back, they had to go home to choose a new Khan, one of the families didn't accept the chosen Khan and a stalemate began, they never tried to enter Europe again after that.

>ögedei back

Ögedei died

I'm too tired for this.

I know why they never tried conquering Europe, but I'm saying that even if they tried they wouldn't have been too successful

The Mongols marched through the Caucasus during winter and fought the Russians in the same season. They could easily fuck up Europe if they invested the time into it.

>Russia
>Plain

You're a fucking retard who knows fuck all about geography, I bet you couldn't even point it out on the fucking map. Murrican education at its finest.

>Destroy armies 2-4x your size
Are you fucking retarded? In most battles the mongols decisively outnumbered their enemies, Mohi for exception, where they faced the Hungarian army equal in size.
Amd no, the Mongolian troops weren't a "small scouting party" as you're desperately trying to put it, they sent 9 fucking tyumen (around 90.000 soldiers) against Hungary.
>They never tried to enter Europe after again
But that's bullshit, they attacked Poland at least two times after that, amd invaded Hungary again in 1285, where they were completely and utterly smashed by the Hungarian armies.

That's a big horde

>kievan rus
>which couldn't even build stone fortifications
>fractured and falling
Maybe in its inception, but by the 13th century, they were nothing (hence why they fell so easily)

>It's all speculative
My ass, we have estimates, much more reasonable than the bullshit crap you posted
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasion_of_Europe#Invasion_into_Central_Europe
>destroying everything they came across
Except castles.
>with a tiny scouting party
It equaled European armies
>successfully invading Russia during winter
I think i might literally hate you. Rus != Russia
>they at the very least stood a good chance
The only correct thing you said the entire post.
pic related, also, density of castles and population matter, like he literally said

Chill out dude, this mongolposter said first that the Mongol army consisted of 1000 people and they destroyed 60.000 strong armies. He knows nothing about this whole topic, just ignore him.

>successfully invading Russia during winter

The rus were sparsely populated states on the steppes with no fortifications on the level of the europeans, of course they would fall against the mongols.

>at the very least stood a good chance

They didn't stand a chance against western Europe, do you remember who Attila was? The mongols were using the same strategies and tactics that he used 1000 years earlier against european barbarians living in the woods with no castles and he still got defeated by them!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Bassianae

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Catalaunian_Plains

Is it always a mad polish/Hungarian that bitches that mongol superiority is a meme?

Well the mad Hungarians actually learnt from their mistakes after the first Mongol invasion and completely blew their 'mongol superiority' asses off whenever they tried to enter the country again :DDD

Had the mongols invested the same level of planning, energy, and manpower into the invasion of Hungary, Poland etc. as they did China or Iran the second times around they would have crushed them indisputably :PPP

Is it always a mongoloid that believes the mongols were the master race?

Subutai was the best Mongol commander, prove me wrong.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subutai

leader I meant

>Muh stone walls

If you retards actually did any kind of research you'd know that the Rus principalities had stone castles and walled cities but none of it mattered because the Mongols wiped out their armies and forced them into submission.

>They didn't stand a chance against western Europe, do you remember who Attila was?

Don't even mention the Huns in the same breath as the Mongols unless you're one of those retards who thinks that horse archers were OP

This

China was not only more densely populated but they had better fortifications and siege technology. It took the Mongols close to a century from Temujin to Kublai to finally conquer China and that's where they invested most of their time and energy, everywhere else was a minor theater compared to the conquest of China.

Burkhan Khaldun.

>Rus principalities had stone castles and walled cities but none of it mattered

Maybe a few somewhere, which weren't enough and it certainly wasn't so at Kiev which had wooden walls that you can see on my picture.


books.google.de/books?id=WVu1CwAAQBAJ&pg=PA46&lpg=PA46&dq=siege of kiev wooden walls&source=bl&ots=61dFfqMSNB&sig=Gd1XmVk3IJKp53Z-TwMsKw8h7Dc&hl=de&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiSpan2jcbNAhWBIpoKHTcDDjQQ6AEIPjAE#v=onepage&q=siege of kiev wooden walls&f=false

>Don't even mention the Huns in the same breath as the Mongols unless you're one of those retards who thinks that horse archers were OP

Yeah literally no difference between the Huns and Mongols, both used cavalry armies that just weren't made for the terrain in europe.

Sure they reinforced their armies with infantry from conquered and weak states like Serbia which just weren't on par with western european infantry.

The mongols will not survive a charge by european heavy cavalry if they are pressed against difficult terrain.
They will also not survive an ambush by knights in the woods.
Not to mention that the mongol arrowspam tactic will not work against armored opponents. Reab about the Battle of Lechfeld where the HRE completely destroyed the Magyars without any problems.

>everywhere else was a minor theater compared to the conquest of China.

Batu Khan sent threating letters to the King of Hungary and the Holy Roman Emperor, yet they did not reply to the Mongols, noone feared the "mongol one trick hordes" in Europe.

The conquest of China was done with many thousand Chinese infantry and cavalry that fucking DEFECTED to them. Also there was an alliance with the Song against the Jin, they wouldn't stand a chance against China with their usual army setup.

Wrong, Hungary in the 1280s had more stone castles then the entire China, and that coupled terrain unsuitable to the mongols. The second invasion of Hungary was completely repelled in in just 2 months.

Genghis Khan is admired because he was born without anything and conquered so much, even if he had to kill a bunch of Chinese to do it.

>Maybe a few somewhere, which weren't enough and it certainly wasn't so at Kiev which had wooden walls that you can see on my picture.

And it was exactly the same with the rest of Europe during the first invasion

>Yeah literally no difference between the Huns and Mongols, both used cavalry armies that just weren't made for the terrain in europe.

There you go thinking that all cavalry armies are the same. Horse archery is one of the worst styles of warfare in the world and is easily countered by foot archers. The Huns were just a large group of steppe nomads that faced off against a decaying Roman Empire, the Mongols were a disciplined and highly organized force that brought low several major empires. The Mongols were not your typical steppe nomads and their success wasn't due to their style of warfare, their success was due to their organization, tactics and strategies they employed.

>The mongols will not survive a charge by european heavy cavalry if they are pressed against difficult terrain.

Wrong, read up on Subotai and his incursion into Georgia. And the Mongols had heavy cavalry of their own that were easily on par with European knights.

>Batu Khan sent threating letters to the King of Hungary and the Holy Roman Emperor, yet they did not reply to the Mongols, noone feared the "mongol one trick hordes" in Europe.

Wrong, the Mongol threat to Europe was very real not an active but a looming one. There were regular correspondence with the kingdoms of Europe through embassies as far as France.

>Also there was an alliance with the Song against the Jin, they wouldn't stand a chance against China with their usual army setup.

You're absolutely right about this. Many times the Mongols got their shit pushed in by the Chinese and it was in the Chinese theater that the Mongols suffered their most devastating defeats.

>And it was exactly the same with the rest of Europe during the first invasion

Only in Hungary and Poland, not in Italy, the HRE, England and France.

>the Mongols were a disciplined and highly organized force that brought low several major empires

Which "major" empires? The Jin that assasinated their own generals or the Khwarezmians that let weather defeat their troops while on a expedition?

The only real empire at that time was the HRE ( you might laugh a bit, but its true for that time)

>the Mongols had heavy cavalry of their own that were easily on par with European knights.

Not true, see:

> Following the Mongol victory at the Battle of Legnica, Wenceslaus fell back to gather reinforcements from Thuringia and Saxony, but was overtaken by the Mongol vanguard at Kłodzko. However, the Bohemian cavalry easily fended off the Mongol detachment.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wenceslaus_I_of_Bohemia

>During this event, members of Queen Elizabeth's household launched a spirited and effective sally against the Mongols, while she watched from the safety of the walls of Buda. The Mongols were ultimately defeated when met head-on in battle by the hastily assembled royal army of Ladislaus IV, in the hills of western Transylvania. The army had benefited from the reforms and had a higher proportion of "knights" than the army the Mongols had defeated a few decades earlier at Mohi.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Mongol_invasion_of_Hungary


>Wrong, the Mongol threat to Europe was very real not an active but a looming one

Wrong, the mongols were never a threat to western Europe, because if Hungary can easily defeat them after a few reforms then so can Western Europe without them because of bigger manpower, better geared soldiers and higher ammount of castles.

The mongols could only storm grasslands - the End.

>Which "major" empires? The Jin that assasinated their own generals or the Khwarezmians that let weather defeat their troops while on a expedition?

Now you're just performing mental gymnastics

>Not true, see:

Proving nothing

>Wrong, the mongols were never a threat to western Europe, because if Hungary can easily defeat them after a few reforms then so can Western Europe

And every single historian will disagree with you. The only thing that permanently ended the threat the Mongols posed to Europe was when the Timurids sacked the capital of the Golden Horde, Sarai, and wiped out its army.

>The mongols could only storm grasslands - the End.

Right because apparently their conquest of the mountainous Caucasus, the wild frozen woodlands of Rus and the tropical jungles of Southern China all never happened.

>Proving nothing

Because you say so? As a matter of fact the mongols never came back to Hungary and Poland after their failed invasions.

>The only thing that permanently ended the threat the Mongols posed to Europe was when the Timurids sacked the capital of the Golden Horde

The same Golden Horde that got wiped out in 1280 by a reformed Hungary and Poland?
Oh wait no it's the one from the late 14th century, an even weaker one!
From the same century that the Mongols got btfo off China and Persia, loosing 2 of their 4 khanates.

At that time the mongols were only a threat to russians and noone else.

>wild frozen woodlands of Rus

Rus is nothing compared to England, France, Italy and HRE, later even Hungary, they were all financially and militarily stronger then them.

>conquest of the mountainous Caucasus

They didn't even finish Georgia by themselves. It seriously weakened by a previous Invasion from a shah.

>This offensive, which would prove the ruin of Georgia, was preceded by the devastating conflict with Jalal ad-Din Mingburnu, a refugee shah of Khwarezmia, who had demanded in 1225, that the Georgian government support his war against the Mongols. The ensuing Khwarezmian attack, Tblisi was captured in 1226, and much of the former strength and prosperity of the Kingdom of Georgia was destroyed, leaving the country largely defenseless in the face of the forthcoming Mongol conquests.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia

>tropical jungles of Southern China all never happened.

Done many hundred thousand Chinese infantry, the same chinese intantry that the mongols coulnd't bring over to Europe.

They were the Orient's Macedonia t b h

The most important thing to ever grace Hulegu's legacy besides destroying Baghdad was that his son Tekuder converted to Islam which would later dominate the Ilkhanate and make way for Timur.

Those things are not mutually exclusive.

>(2017)

user never mentioned it was.

not even that other guy, but you should kill yourself

>Ever wondered why they couldn't even conquer Poland and Hungary?
That's right, they were too scared of the disciplined Hussars and their lances of destruction. Even in World War II, German soldiers targeted the men on horseback first because their killing power was feared and respected.

>I can't handle the facts so you should kill yourself !

The mongols had one lucky strike during 1206-1240 were they never met any serious resistance up to the point where they came into western Europe and later Egypt which mopped the floor with them for 50 years.

Google all their failed invasions and see whom they couldn't invade.

Hint: it has something to do with steppes and population density.

>Because you say so? As a matter of fact the mongols never came back to Hungary and Poland after their failed invasions.

You're clearly a moron if you think that a specialized unit alone is the sole determinant of a war. You've proved nothing.

>The same Golden Horde that got wiped out in 1280 by a reformed Hungary and Poland?

And yet enough of a threat that both powers maintained heavy garrisons in the frontiers and the Golden Horde was still able to coerce tributes to stave off the raids from time to time

>From the same century that the Mongols got btfo off China and Persia, loosing 2 of their 4 khanates.
>treating post-Ögedeid Mongolia as a single polity

The rest of your post is nothing more than mental gymnastics and dismissive drivel. I'll repeat the point that I've made: The Mongols could have taken Europe had they invested the same effort they did in China but the former wasn't worth taking because it was poorer compared to everywhere else in the Old World.

If you aint first, you're last.

> The rest of your post is nothing more than mental gymnastics
Ad hominem... not an argument