Sei sulla pagina 1di 1191

jump to content

my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info

If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.

permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers

facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of

Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.

permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago

when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent

load more comments (1 reply)


[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)

[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago


And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago

Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'


permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)

[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago


Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)

[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago


where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl

y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago

With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b

ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)

[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago


All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent

load more comments (3 replies)


load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore

igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)

[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago


Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)

[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago


And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g

otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe


nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.

It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago

It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa

rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!


permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.

permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago

Well, they were the exception.


permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon

g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent

[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago


I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.

Absolutely incredible narrative.


permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago

Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.


permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul

s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent

[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago


Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago

He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me

permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)

[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago


Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!

Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes

" narrative that so many people seem to believe.


permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre

ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink

[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago


Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking

at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember


permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").

All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).


Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun

ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent

[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago


Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a

nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt

permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent

[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago


When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.

permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three

Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago

Scan as you attack.


permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent

[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago


Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago

I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent

[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago


Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent

load more comments (2 replies)


[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago

With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago

Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin

permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent

[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago


Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)

[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago


There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi

t out ages before.


permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.

There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).

We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and

complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.

permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent

[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago


They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago

The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil

l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent

load more comments (1 reply)


[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.

permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent

[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago


They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...

permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo

rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago

Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago

Sticks on horses to create dust storms


that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz

SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago

There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he

would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago

They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago

Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!


permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store

redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").

"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.


No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!

permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago

It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago

Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.


permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.

permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent

[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago


"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)

[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago


Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent

load more comments (2 replies)


load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he

was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec

tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent

[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago


barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)

[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago


Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent

[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago


We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago

And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent

[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago


well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago

Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim

e Rome was going down the drain?


permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more

straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent

[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*


Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent

load more comments (2 replies)


[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent

[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago


And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut

permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi

story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/


hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu

re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.

permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink

[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago


No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent

load more comments (1 reply)


[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago

I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall

y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t

he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent

[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago


I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago

Is the movie Mogol any good?


permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but

he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago

These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.

permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink

[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago


Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink

[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago


Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons

widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on

a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn


ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou

nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago

Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent

continue this thread


[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)

[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago


Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun

Tsu you must think you're their enemy.


permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago

You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.


permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy

From the 36 Strategems playbook.


permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent

[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago


And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent

[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago


at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.

permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.

Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him
a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent

[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago


Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too

permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r

ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent

[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago


The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent

[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago


Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent

[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago


Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent

[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago


Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo

cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)

[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago


I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.

permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area

They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?

Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?

permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl

d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.

permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo

st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent

load more comments (1 reply)


[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago

I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent

[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*


Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago

It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.


permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.

permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago

Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK

E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink

[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago


Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago

ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink

[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago


There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago

I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools

mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:

Titles must begin with "TIL ..."


Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article -

Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:

"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.

permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)

[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago


Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago

That makes a lot of sense, actually.


permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent

[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago


You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago

I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms


permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent

[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago


Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.

Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.

permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor

st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago

This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China

and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of

ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak

e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?

permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)

[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago


Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a

llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.


The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent

load more comments (1 reply)


[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r

ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul

ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago

Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the

bedrock of psychological war.


permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.

permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago

they hate us cause they anus.


permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."

permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent

[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago


There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'

permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.

permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago

It's like Asian Game of Thrones.


permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.

permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink

[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago


Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come

stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink

[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago


Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink

[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago


The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.

Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym

an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel

permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c

ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.


permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ

reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.

Nothing related to recent politics.


No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare

top 500 comments


sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve

n if it's a little apologist at times


permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).

permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same

way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago

When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage

permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.

permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop

ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!

permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens

of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel


y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.

permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr

permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago

Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.

Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"

permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent

[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago


I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).

permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)

[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago


I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago

Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p

olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent

[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago


Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.

permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago

Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.


permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago

I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that

SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.


permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do

you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?


And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago

All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent

[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago


Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi

se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes

Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?


permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi

es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.


I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in

to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago

This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago

Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!

permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.

permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago

This thread makes me miss the history channel.


permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t

he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise

jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).

No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea


t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun

ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage

d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent

[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago


It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death

The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago

So says Sun Tsu


Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense

permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent

[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago


Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.

permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for

ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal

l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend


permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.

What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no

t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago

This should be top comment


permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent

[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago


Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul

d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago

NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent

[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago


Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan

permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago

He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent

[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago


Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want

to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays

as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w


ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'

is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent

[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago


Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent

[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago


I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago

This always stuck with me.


A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/

Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.


permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent

[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago


*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.

permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him

...I kind of figured most of that was made up.


I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo

ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.


permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago

You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon

gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago

Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor


e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals

to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling

the STORY of history while giving clean facts.


permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca

lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink

[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago


Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog

about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules

Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s


upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more

4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t

o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s


mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.

permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio

n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th

ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago

Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)

[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago


Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)

[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago


They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent

[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago


The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.

permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.

permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.

permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t

ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If


they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.

permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)

load more comments (21 replies)


[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago

Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.


permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent

[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago


'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese

The last 2 classes are basically slaves.


permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a

nger of God, or any gods.


permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from

permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.

permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)

[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*

Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent

[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago


Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*

Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent

[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago


KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago

5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?

permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind

of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago

Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago

The Mongols: Known rusemen.


permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago

Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago

Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.

permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago

If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink

[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago


Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago

Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall


permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround

ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.

permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!

You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn

roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.

permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago

DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?


permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon

d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago

Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent

[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago


More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago

You forgot the last line:


"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc

ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil

y knowing that no army would chase them.


permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago

Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.

permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.

permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago

Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.


permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago

Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo

d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya

permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.

Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac

ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte

r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.

They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago

NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago

I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent

[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago


Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse

permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)

[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago


That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!

permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor

eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).


permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t

ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl

e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent

[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago


decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink

[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago


You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink

[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago


It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.

permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink

[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago


When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago

I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink

[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago


they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo

ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.

permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe

7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279

lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred

ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the

ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,

but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent

[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago


This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent

[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago


Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.

permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago

The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact

ical advantage and very organized.


permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)

load more comments (3 replies)


[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago

If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk

permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago

I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent

[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago


From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.

permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source.
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you

see
Goo

sou

or

anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)

permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent

[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago


Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day

permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.

permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago

It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.

By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent

[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago


It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.

permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago

Breaking down my schitty wall!!


permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.

http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and

now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history

:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago

While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i

n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th

is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent

[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago


... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago

If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much

fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink

[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago


Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink

[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago


All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink

[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago


The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork

permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago

http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:

remember mereset passwordlogin


Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators

MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming

any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.

Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)

load more comments (2 replies)


[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent

[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago


In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are

permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.

permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent

[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago


Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago

That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago

Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe

is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv

e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int

o the populaces they were invading. It worked.


(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.

permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent

[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago


I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent

[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago


the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago

Never said it was Sino-specific


permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago

Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago

I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago

Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.


permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.

Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can

do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.

It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia

permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i

n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.


permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)

[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago


God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent

[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago


They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s

uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago

If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo


permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago

I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e

very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago

It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.


permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated

permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou

t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.


www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)

I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink

[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago


Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.

If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh

oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago

We are the exception.


permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.

Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English

this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015


4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.

To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser

ious as the call-to-arms


with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago

Holy holocaust batman that's intense


permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc

enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.


permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago

A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.


The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w

hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.


permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)

[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago


One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)

[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago


When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)

[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago


Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago

Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago

Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.


permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'

t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of

barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread

load more comments (1 reply)


load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.

permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);

The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).


This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent

[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago


Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent

[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago


did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to

o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a

sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.

The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet

permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (6 replies)


[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago

Dan carlins podcast


permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.

also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)

[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago


Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent

[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago


I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)

[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago


In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be

en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago

I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre

amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent

[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago


I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago

And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago

Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible


permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.

permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink

[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago


Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago

The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval

ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink

[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago


One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.

permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments

related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)

add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.


Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)

[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago


dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago

Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.


permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.

permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago

The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"


A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago

Typical American strategy


permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent

[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago


XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago

Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent

[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago


Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago

The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago

I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.

permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.

permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent

[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago


TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b

eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago

Romans, not Greeks.


permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.

permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent

load more comments (1 reply)


[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'

t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.

http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.

You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!

permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep

lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent

[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago


The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp

ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago

I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.

permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago

The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.

permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.

I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough

t racket vs. one that you made yourself..


And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!

permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed

his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink

[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago


Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city

/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink

[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago


Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink

[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago


They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink

[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago


Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered

permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.

permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat

tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:

avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)


link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.

The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)

[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago


It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent

[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago


They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope

n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent

[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago


A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent

load more comments (3 replies)


[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago

GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w


udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent

load more comments (8 replies)


[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)

[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago


Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/

Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.

permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.

permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent

[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago


And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex

t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.

Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.

permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.

permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.

permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent

load more comments (2 replies)


[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr

etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent

[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago


I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.

Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...

permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago

Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!


permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent

[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago


Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h

orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.


permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago

Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00

0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do

esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur

chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago

Lots of other people, too.


permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago

TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.

permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)

[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago


Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people

permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info

permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.

permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?

permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires

in camps so it looked like they had more people


permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge

tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the

moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!


More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.

The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole

thing over again.


permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it

permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent

load more comments (10 replies)


[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.

permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent

load more comments (4 replies)


[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago

Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet

permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago

Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago

Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)

[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago


Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.

I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago

The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a

nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago

Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.


permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!

permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago

Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.

permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago

Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.

permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right

the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent

[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago


Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source

permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It

's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!

permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.

permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe

rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically

permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago

They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.


Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink

[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago


This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago

He better have, it's just the American thing to do.


permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.

They were stronger and better equipped.


permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged

combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!

Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.

permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago

OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago

If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...


permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R

eminds me of game of thrones


permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.

p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info

If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.

permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers

facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of

Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.

permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago

when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent

load more comments (1 reply)


[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)

[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago


And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago

Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'


permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)

[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago


Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)

[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago


where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl

y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago

With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b

ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)

[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago


All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent

load more comments (3 replies)


load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore

igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)

[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago


Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)

[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago


And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g

otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe


nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.

It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago

It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa

rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!


permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.

permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago

Well, they were the exception.


permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon

g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent

[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago


I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.

Absolutely incredible narrative.


permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago

Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.


permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul

s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent

[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago


Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago

He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me

permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)

[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago


Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!

Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes

" narrative that so many people seem to believe.


permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre

ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink

[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago


Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking

at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember


permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit

Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").

All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).


Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun

ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent

[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago


Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a

nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt

permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent

[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago


When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.

permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three

Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago

Scan as you attack.


permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent

[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago


Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago

I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent

[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago


Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent

load more comments (2 replies)


[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago

With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago

Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin

permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent

[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago


Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)

[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago


There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi

t out ages before.


permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.

There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).

We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and

complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.

permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent

[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago


They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago

The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil

l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent

load more comments (1 reply)


[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.

permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent

[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago


They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...

permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo

rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago

Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago

Sticks on horses to create dust storms


that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz

SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago

There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he

would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago

They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago

Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!


permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store

redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").

"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.


No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!

permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago

It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago

Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.


permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.

permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent

[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago


"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)

[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago


Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent

load more comments (2 replies)


load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he

was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec

tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent

[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago


barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)

[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago


Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent

[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago


We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago

And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent

[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago


well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago

Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim

e Rome was going down the drain?


permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more

straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent

[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*


Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent

load more comments (2 replies)


[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent

[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago


And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut

permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi

story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/


hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu

re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.

permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink

[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago


No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent

load more comments (1 reply)


[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago

I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall

y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t

he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent

[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago


I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago

Is the movie Mogol any good?


permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but

he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago

These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.

permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink

[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago


Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink

[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago


Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons

widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on

a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn


ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou

nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago

Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent

continue this thread


[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)

[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago


Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun

Tsu you must think you're their enemy.


permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago

You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.


permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy

From the 36 Strategems playbook.


permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent

[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago


And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent

[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago


at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.

permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.

Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him
a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent

[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago


Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too

permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r

ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent

[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago


The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent

[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago


Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent

[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago


Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent

[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago


Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo

cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)

[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago


I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.

permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area

They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?

Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?

permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl

d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.

permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo

st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent

load more comments (1 reply)


[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago

I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent

[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*


Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago

It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.


permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.

permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago

Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK

E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink

[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago


Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago

ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink

[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago


There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago

I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools

mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:

Titles must begin with "TIL ..."


Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article -

Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:

"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.

permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)

[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago


Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago

That makes a lot of sense, actually.


permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent

[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago


You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago

I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms


permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent

[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago


Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.

Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.

permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor

st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago

This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China

and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of

ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak

e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?

permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)

[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago


Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a

llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.


The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent

load more comments (1 reply)


[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r

ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul

ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago

Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the

bedrock of psychological war.


permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.

permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago

they hate us cause they anus.


permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."

permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent

[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago


There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'

permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.

permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago

It's like Asian Game of Thrones.


permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.

permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink

[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago


Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come

stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink

[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago


Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink

[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago


The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.

Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym

an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel

permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c

ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.


permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ

reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.

Nothing related to recent politics.


No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare

top 500 comments


sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve

n if it's a little apologist at times


permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).

permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same

way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago

When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage

permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.

permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop

ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!

permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens

of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel


y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.

permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr

permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago

Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.

Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"

permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent

[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago


I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).

permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)

[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago


I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago

Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p

olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent

[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago


Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.

permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago

Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.


permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago

I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that

SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.


permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do

you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?


And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago

All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent

[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago


Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi

se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes

Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?


permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi

es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.


I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in

to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago

This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago

Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!

permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.

permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago

This thread makes me miss the history channel.


permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t

he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise

jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).

No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea


t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun

ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage

d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent

[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago


It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death

The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago

So says Sun Tsu


Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense

permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent

[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago


Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.

permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for

ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal

l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend


permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.

What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no

t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago

This should be top comment


permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent

[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago


Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul

d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago

NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent

[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago


Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan

permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago

He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent

[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago


Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want

to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays

as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w


ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'

is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent

[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago


Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent

[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago


I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago

This always stuck with me.


A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/

Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.


permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent

[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago


*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.

permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him

...I kind of figured most of that was made up.


I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo

ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.


permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago

You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon

gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago

Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor


e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals

to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling

the STORY of history while giving clean facts.


permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca

lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink

[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago


Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog

about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules

Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s


upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more

4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t

o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s


mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.

permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio

n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th

ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago

Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)

[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago


Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)

[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago


They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent

[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago


The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.

permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.

permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.

permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t

ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If


they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.

permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)

load more comments (21 replies)


[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago

Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.


permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent

[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago


'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese

The last 2 classes are basically slaves.


permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a

nger of God, or any gods.


permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from

permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.

permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)

[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*

Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent

[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago


Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*

Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent

[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago


KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago

5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?

permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind

of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago

Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago

The Mongols: Known rusemen.


permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago

Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago

Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.

permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago

If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink

[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago


Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago

Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall


permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround

ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.

permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!

You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn

roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.

permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago

DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?


permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon

d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago

Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent

[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago


More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago

You forgot the last line:


"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc

ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil

y knowing that no army would chase them.


permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago

Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.

permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.

permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago

Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.


permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago

Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo

d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya

permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.

Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac

ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte

r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.

They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago

NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago

I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent

[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago


Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse

permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)

[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago


That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!

permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor

eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).


permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t

ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl

e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent

[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago


decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink

[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago


You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink

[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago


It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.

permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink

[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago


When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago

I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink

[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago


they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo

ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.

permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe

7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279

lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred

ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the

ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,

but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent

[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago


This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent

[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago


Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.

permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago

The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact

ical advantage and very organized.


permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)

load more comments (3 replies)


[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago

If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk

permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago

I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent

[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago


From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations

permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.

permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source.
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you

see
Goo

sou

or

anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)

permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent

[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago


Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day

permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.

permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago

It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.

By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent

[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago


It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.

permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago

Breaking down my schitty wall!!


permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.

http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and

now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history

:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago

While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i

n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th

is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent

[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago


... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago

If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much

fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink

[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago


Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink

[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago


All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink

[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago


The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork

permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago

http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:

remember mereset passwordlogin


Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators

MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming

any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.

Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)

load more comments (2 replies)


[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent

[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago


In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are

permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.

permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent

[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago


Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago

That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago

Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe

is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv

e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int

o the populaces they were invading. It worked.


(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.

permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent

[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago


I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent

[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago


the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago

Never said it was Sino-specific


permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago

Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago

I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago

Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.


permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.

Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can

do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.

It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia

permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i

n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.


permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)

[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago


God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent

[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago


They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s

uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago

If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo


permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago

I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e

very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago

It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.


permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated

permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou

t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.


www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)

I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink

[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago


Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.

If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh

oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago

We are the exception.


permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.

Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English

this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015


4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.

To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser

ious as the call-to-arms


with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago

Holy holocaust batman that's intense


permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc

enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.


permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago

A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.


The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w

hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.


permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)

[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago


One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)

[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago


When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)

[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago


Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago

Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago

Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.


permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'

t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of

barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread

load more comments (1 reply)


load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.

permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);

The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).


This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent

[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago


Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent

[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago


did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to

o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a

sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.

The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet

permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (6 replies)


[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago

Dan carlins podcast


permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.

also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)

[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago


Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent

[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago


I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)

[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago


In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be

en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago

I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre

amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent

[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago


I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago

And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago

Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible


permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.

permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink

[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago


Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago

The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval

ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink

[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago


One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.

permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat
tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments

related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:
avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)
link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)

add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.


Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.
The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)

[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago


dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago
It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago

Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.


permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago
They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.

permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope
n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago

The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"


A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago

Typical American strategy


permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent

[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago


XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w
udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago

Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent

[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago


Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago
Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago

The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago

I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.

permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.
permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.

permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent
[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent

[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago


TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex
t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b

eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago

Romans, not Greeks.


permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.

permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.
permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent

load more comments (1 reply)


[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'

t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.

http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr
etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.

You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago
I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!

permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.
Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep

lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...
permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent

[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago


The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago
Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!
permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp

ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago

I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h
orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.

permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago
Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago

The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00
0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.

permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do
esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.

I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur
chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough

t racket vs. one that you made yourself..


And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Lots of other people, too.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!

permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago
TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed

his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink

[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago


Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city

/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people
permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink

[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago


Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info
permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink

[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago


They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.
permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink

[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago


Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered

permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires
in camps so it looked like they had more people
permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.

permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p jump to content
my subreddits
front-all-random | philosophy-pics-worldnews-personalfinance-music-food-gaming-s
pace-diy-upliftingnews-nosleep-videos-oldschoolcool-todayilearned-iama-movies-ge
tmotivated-sports-fitness-lifeprotips-askreddit-europe-twoxchromosomes-news-tifu
-documentaries-internetisbeautiful-dataisbeautiful-listentothis-television-showe
rthoughts-gifs-writingprompts-funny-nottheonion-history-mildlyinteresting-asksci
ence-aww-jokes-creepy-books-science-art-explainlikeimfive-earthporn-photoshopbat

tles-futurology-gadgets
more
todayilearned todayilearned
comments
related
other discussions (1)
want to join? sign in or create an account in seconds|English
this post was submitted on 13 Jan 2015
4,198
(97% upvoted)
shortlink:
remember mereset passwordlogin
Submit a new link
todayilearned
unsubscribe
7,433,951
10,240 users here now
NEW TO REDDIT? CLICK HERE!
You learn something new every day; what did you learn today?
Submit interesting and specific facts that you just found out (not broad informa
tion you looked up, TodayILearned is not /r/wikipedia).
Posting rules
Submissions must be verifiable. Please link directly to a reliable source that s
upports every claim in your post title. Images alone do not count as valid refer
ences. Videos are fine so long as they come from reputable sources (e.g. BBC, Di
scovery, etc).
No personal opinions, anecdotes or subjective statements (e.g "TIL xyz is a grea
t movie").
No news or recent sources. News and any sources (blog, article, press release, v
ideo, etc.) more recent than two months are not allowed.
Nothing related to recent politics.
No misleading claims. Posts that omit essential information, or present unrelate
d facts in a way that suggest a connection will be removed.
Rephrase your post title if the following are not met:
Titles must begin with "TIL ..."
Make them descriptive, concise and specific (e.g. not "TIL something interesting
about bacon").
Titles must be able to stand on their own without requiring readers to click on
a link. Starting your title with a why/what/who/where/how modifier should be unn
ecessary.
"TIL about ..." and other broad posts don't belong on TIL. Try /r/Wikipedia, etc
. instead, or be more specific (and avoid the word "about").
"TIL how to ..." posts belong on /r/HowTo.
No trivial or obvious facts (e.g. "TIL the sky is blue"), or facts that appeal o
nly to a narrow audience, specifically no software/website tips (e.g. "TIL you c
an click on widgets in WidgetMaker 1.22").
All NSFW links must be tagged (including comments).
Please see the wiki for more detailed explanations of the rules.
(Why we need rules)
Additional info
If your post does not appear in the new queue and you think it meets the above r
ules, please contact the moderators (include a link to your reddit.com post, not
your story).
Please report spam, inaccurate or otherwise inappropriate posts by messaging the
moderators, as this helps us remove them more promptly!
More information available on the TIL FAQ and wiki.
Etiquette
We ask that you please do the following:

avoid mobile versions of websites (e.g. m.wikipedia.org)


link to the appropriate heading when referencing an article (particularly on Wik
ipedia)
link to the appropriate start time when referencing videos (e.g. on YouTube)
add [PDF] or [NSFW] tags to your posts, as necessary.
Please avoid reposting TILs that have already made the front page in the past
Please also read the site-wide Reddiquette.
Talk with us on IRC: #todayIlearned on irc.freenode.org, or just click here.
To adapt this style to your own subreddit, message /u/legweed! Thanks legweed!
You are loved.
a community for 6 years
message the moderators
MODERATORS
nix0n
wacrover
relic2279
lukemcr
manbra
Geekymumma
sdn
roger_
Lynda73
lanismycousinSo yummy!
...and 11 more
4198
TIL that Mongols were actually outnumbered in most of their victories in battles
. But they still managed to deceive their enemies by elaborate ruses - like moun
ting dummies atop horses, and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust s
torms. (hexapolis.com)
submitted 6 hours ago by Dattatreya87
947 commentsshare
top 500 comments
sorted by: best
[ ]Dattatreya87[S] 252 points 6 hours ago
From the article Another interesting decoy tactic used by the Mongols entailed positioning stuffe
d dummies atop horses
an animal resource that always available to them in great
quantity (each Mongol warrior was known to have five to six horses for each camp
aign). There were cases of elaborate ruse when the generals intentionally surrou
nded themselves with a bevy of dummy soldiers, thus endowing them with an intimi
datory air. And lastly, the Mongol troopers were also known for tying sticks to
their horses tails that raised enormous dust clouds on their backs, which made th
e enemies think of huge Mongol reinforcements approaching the battlefield!
permalink
[ ]CrazyAlienHobo 150 points 2 hours ago
There is another reason why we think that the military analysts of the time repe
atedly overestimated the numbers of mongol armies. Since the whole army was moun
ted and self sufficient, they could move them very fast. So fast, that military
analysts of the time counted the same army more than once when estimating the mo
ngols power, because they thought that there was no way Army A could be the same
army as Army B.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 34 minutes ago
And the reason we now know better is that amature historians in the early 20th c
enturies started poking holes in certain historical naratives.
The thing that bothered them was that the steppe simply didn't seem to have enou
gh food to feed the number of people Ghengis reportedly had. Basically an army t
hat big would have to move each day or the livestock would starve and so would t
he men.

The roughly 200.000 men and their families Ghengis did have were already taxing
to feed. The millions he was said to have would have bean impossible.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]goodguy_asshole 238 points 2 hours ago
dude, I think you missed the most interesting fact in this article.
For Mongols, warfare was akin to hunting, and in both cases they were the predat
ors. In that regard, the call up for each winter hunt was viewed as being as ser
ious as the call-to-arms
with the entire endeavor replicating a military campaig
n. Grand plans were hatched to choose the particular grounds for hunting, and ev
ery soldier participating in the complex exercise was given a specific role to f
ulfill. Oddly enough, the Mongols were forbidden (on pain of death) from harming
any of the animals before they were surrounded and gathered in to a cordoned ar
ea. Finally, the Great Khan was allowed to make the first kill, after which his
generals joined in, and later on the soldiers added to the massacre of wild life
that ranged from wild boars, gazelles to Siberian tigers and wolves. The incred
ibly vicious exercise was seen as a lesson of fine tactics for the upcoming offi
cers, and as such historians have found similar strategies being implemented in
renowned Mongol victories like the battles of Mohi and Leignitz.
I am at a loss for words.
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 138 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols learned some valuable lessons about warfare from hunting. Cornering
some game is dangerous, as the animal will realize there's no escape and fight t
o the death. When surrounding a dangerous creature, hunters learned to leave a s
mall opening in their formation so the animal attempts to escape- it becomes an
easy kill when presented with an option to flee rather than fight
Turns out the same idea worked on people. If the Mongols were winning and manage
d to surround the enemy, they would leave the same gap open. The enemy would bre
ak ranks and try to run away rather than form up and make a last stand... turns
out that doesn't work so well for the quarry regardless of species
Source: "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World". Pretty good read, eve
n if it's a little apologist at times
permalinkparent
[ ]Taurik 52 points 1 hour ago
That's also attributed to Sun Tzu:
"When you surround an army, leave an outlet free. Do not press a desperate foe t
oo hard."
permalinkparent
[ ]RamssesSeba 8 points 1 hour ago
Good find. It's interesting to read about these techniques that different civili
zations figure out independently of one another
permalinkparent
[ ]bombos [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
It's possible that Ghengis Khan studied the Sun Tzu's Art of War. He had Buddhis
t and Taoist advisors, some with some knowledge of Chinese history, military in
particular.
permalinkparent
[ ]neohellpoet [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
Tell that to Hanibal or the Roman army he destroyed at Canni.
There's an advantage to total enveloent. You effectively neutralized most of the
enemy army who are stuck in the middle and you have a larger number of soldiers
facing the enemy do to the outer circle always being wider than the inner.
Leaving an opening is a good idea if you can get the enemy to rout and you can r
un them down. If however they retreat in good order or they escape and regroup y
ou just squandered the chance to win a decisive victory and get to do the whole
thing over again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (7 replies)

[ ]DingyWarehouse 13 points 2 hours ago


It's almost as if they could open a zoo
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 1 point 2 hours ago
Starring Matt Damon ... and John Wayne.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 22 points 2 hours ago
Holy holocaust batman that's intense
permalinkparent
[ ]B_afraid 53 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
Actually, the worst part about them (besides murdering everybody - and I mean EV
ERYBODY, including babies - in many conquered cities), was that after leaving su
ch a city, they'd send a rearguard back after 2-3 days, so they can kill even th
e people who had fled and, thinking the mongols were gone, were returning to the
ir homes.
That was really fucked up.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 51 points 1 hour ago
DO YOU DARE SPEAK AGAINST YOUR KHAN, LATIN?
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 23 points 1 hour ago
Everyone should see Netflix's Marco Polo, it's a surprisingly well-done show.
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid 25 points 1 hour ago
Describe it for me, as you saw it.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 11 points 1 hour ago
It's not historically accurate per se, but it focuses on a time in history that
I think most westerners are very poorly informed about (did you know the mongols
ruled an empire that stretched from Poland to China?).
permalinkparent
[ ]earlthomasIII [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Whoosh. "Describe it for me, as you saw it Latin" - reoccurring quote from the K
han of Khans on the show.
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
I know, I know, also there was more to say about it :P
permalinkparent
continue this thread
[ ]UncleGeorge [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
I think you missed the joke, pretty sure he knows about the show since that's th
e exact quote Kublai ask Marco repetively xD
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Lt_Butthurt [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Wells it's about a Latin dude with a nice beard and a dad who doesn't want him a
nd leaves him with a angry badass chubby Mongolian dude who cuts off his beard a
nd sends him to be trained with the dude from Kill Bill all while trying to take
the money from the Chinese guy who took all the money from the Crime Syndicate
in Gothom because Lt Gordon was going to seize all their assets with the help of
Batman and clean up the streets with the help of Harvey Dent. All the meanwhile
the joker just wants to kill Batman. Who leaves for Asia to find Cricket man an
d bring back the money before the Mongolians can tear down the City Wall and tak
e it from the City Wok. And that's how my eyes saw it
permalinkparent
[ ]steelcitykid [score hidden] 47 minutes ago
Take him outside; stuff his mouth with the shit of pigs.
permalinkparent

[ ]Hellknightx 9 points 1 hour ago


They should have just called it Kublai Khan, because Marco himself feels like su
ch a secondary character compared to the Mongol court. Kublai is the real star.
But yes, great show.
permalinkparent
[ ]JustLearnedThis [score hidden] 49 minutes ago
It doesn't help that Marco Polo is a really bland actor. His emotions barely sho
w, and I don't know if that's because of how his scenes are written or if his sc
enes are written without emotion because he cannot show it.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]RamssesSeba 9 points 1 hour ago*
It should be noted that they only did that to cities that resisted. Cities that
surrendered were treated very well- forced to pay tribute and a tithe no doubt,
but there was no rape/killing/pillaging/etc. That may not sound "very well", but
considering the state of medieval-era conquest it's pretty much the absolute be
st outcome if you're losing anyway
Another interesting fact about their surrender/resist policy was a city's respon
d being pretty set in stone- they did not appreciate people changing their minds
. One city's officials (I think in Russia?) defied the Mongols, despite protests
from citizens. By the time the Mongols arrived the citizens deposed their leade
r and welcomed the horde, claiming "New Management" and a friendly administratio
n. Unfortunately, the Mongols didn't buy it and decided the denizens of the city
were dishonorable for reneging on their previous resistance, making them just a
s bad as an enemy. Turncoats were not welcomed by the Mongols, and their betraya
l was pretty much always rewarded with death
The extremes they went to completely wipe a city off the map are not excusable j
ust because of how they treated compliant cities. At least one city in China was
the target of such a grand slaughter that the mounds of decaying corpses formed
fetid pools of human/animal fat. Man, woman, child, even pets ended up the same
way
Source- "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World"
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]yeaheyeah 4 points 1 hour ago
Well that wouldn't have happened had they surrendered in the first place
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]moogleiii 4 points 2 hours ago
Predator sound effects will do.
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Fucking Siberian tigers!? These guys don't mess around.
permalinkparent
[ ]dsmith422 1 point 1 hour ago
Red Dawn - History teacher describing Mongol hunt
permalinkparent
[ ]Onionsteak 1 point 1 hour ago
That's a pretty efficient way to stick more training exercises into their daily
routine.
permalinkparent
[ ]JTsyo2 1 point 1 hour ago
You could say they were training to hunt the most dangerous game.
permalinkparent
load more comments (10 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 18 points 2 hours ago
Another effective tactic used for defeating fortified cities was to ride up with
a small force and pretend to become defeated. The city dwellers would throw ope

n their gates and chase after the pretend defeated force, only to encounter the
bulk of the army in some secluded valley.
permalinkparent
[ ]elhermanobrother 35 points 2 hours ago
The bartender says, "We don't serve faster-than-light warriors here!"
A Mongol walks into a bar.
permalinkparent
[ ]Dilfbert 16 points 1 hour ago
A room temperature superconductor walks into a bar.
The bartender says, "We don't serve room temperature superconductors here!"
The room temperature superconductor leaves without putting up any resistance
permalinkparent
[ ]rpad 7 points 2 hours ago
In Hungary they were defeated during a season of heavy rains and floods, guess t
he dust cloud trick wasn't working then.
permalinkparent
[ ]mossybeard 0 points 2 hours ago
This is what I thought of. Couldn't find it in gif form, so you'll have to bear
with a video
http://youtu.be/aqWYZSOu-DA
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]OilNmashedKeefBlunt 585 points 3 hours ago
When you are far from the enemy he must think you are near, when near he must th
ink you are far. When you outnumber them they must think your forces are few, wh
en your forces are few the enemy must think they are many. So says Sun Tsu
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 417 points 3 hours ago
So says Sun Tsu
Or perhaps he only wants you to think he says that?
permalinkparent
[ ]SecularMantis 322 points 3 hours ago
When you are Sun Tsu, your enemy must think you aren't. When you aren't Sun Tsu,
your enemy must think you are.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 149 points 2 hours ago
That makes a lot of sense, actually.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtyGhettoOmelette 109 points 2 hours ago
When you make a lot of sense, your enemy must think you aren't, When you're Sun
Tsu you must think you're their enemy.
permalinkparent
[ ]cnutnuggets 61 points 2 hours ago
If I don't know what I'm doing so won't my enemies.
permalinkparent
[ ]EnragedTurkey 22 points 2 hours ago
When you know what your enemy is doing, Sun'tzu will think he's outnumbered.
permalinkparent
[ ]onanym 24 points 1 hour ago
When you can't, your enemy must think you even.
permalinkparent
[ ]GormlessFool 5 points 1 hour ago
when all your base are belong to us, Sun Tzu will not know whose enemy we are.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlchemistBite28 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
They don't think it be like it is but it do.
permalinkparent
[ ]bantha_poodoo [score hidden] 27 minutes ago
a lep is a ball.
permalinkparent

[ ]Mogul126 [score hidden] 18 minutes ago


A tay is a hammer.
permalinkparent
[ ]-Ignotus- [score hidden] 58 minutes ago
Typical American strategy
permalinkparent
[ ]cycleflight 9 points 1 hour ago
When I aren't a lot of sense, I sometimes Sun Tsu. But not every time, because w
hen my enemy might think sense, I'm actually a lot of are.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 6 points 1 hour ago
I always knew you were are
permalinkparent
[ ]Postius 10 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in sun.
permalinkparent
[ ]Defenestrate_my_baby 3 points 1 hour ago
Instructions unclear, dick stuck in Sun Tsu.
permalinkparent
[ ]zipzopzoobitybop 2 points 1 hour ago
Boy, I'm glad that we're out here, and Sun Tzu's in there!
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]salt-the-skies 2 points 1 hour ago
Sounds like The Sphinx from Mystery Men is giving advice here.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aweshocked[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
Even that makes alot of sense
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]_donkeyqong_ 9 points 2 hours ago
You must learn to master your rage
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 9 points 2 hours ago
Before your rage masters you.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]Timmeyh01 1 point 2 hours ago
You must balance a tac hammer to have a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]chyn0813 1 point 2 hours ago
"Was that what you were going to say? It was, wasn't it?"
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]juicius 3 points 2 hours ago
As long as you don't think, you can defeat Sun Tzu.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bigblockchevy 7 points 2 hours ago
If you can't outsmart 'em, build a giant wall.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]shangriladiver 1 point 1 hour ago
If you aren't who you are, you are who you aren't.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]DingyWarehouse 1 point 2 hours ago
that sly fox
permalinkparent

load more comments (3 replies)


[ ]Knewrome 104 points 3 hours ago
Sun Tzu. The gamertag of Confucious.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 15 points 1 hour ago
XxxSun_TzuxxX
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]TheGrim1 76 points 2 hours ago
One Chinese general kept a much larger enemy force from invading his fortified v
illage by leaving the gates open while he alone sat atop the gates.
The invader was sure it was a trap and did not attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]UESPA_Sputnik 77 points 2 hours ago
He didn't just sit there, he played the lute having a jolly good time.
That man's name? Albert Einstein Zhuge Liang.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrMastodon 37 points 2 hours ago
More like Huge Wang! The brass balls on that one.
permalinkparent
[ ]brianunderstands [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
More like Hug Wang! Bet he got a lotta handjobs.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]The_Cryptard 23 points 1 hour ago
Alright guys let's be serious here. We're talking about history not Dynasty Warr
iors.
permalinkparent
[ ]Bearded_Gentleman [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Its plausible I think. Liang was considered the greatest strategist of the age w
ho just so happened to excel at ambushes. Playing on his reputation to dupe an e
nemy he had defeated many times before mostly with ambushes.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Numendil 2 points 1 hour ago
I prefer Kongming to keep in line with MTG: Portal Three Kingdoms
permalinkparent
[ ]Idleworker 18 points 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empty_Fort_Strategy
From the 36 Strategems playbook.
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 11 points 1 hour ago
Holy shit it would be evil to do this to a party in d&d...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 8 points 2 hours ago
The Empty Fort Strategy was used plenty of times, most records are in the Three
Kingdoms Era though. I know Zhao Yun did it and Zhuge Liang has a fictional acco
unt in the Romance of the Three Kingdoms.
permalinkparent
load more comments (13 replies)
[ ]hexlordmalacrass 15 points 2 hours ago
And I think he knows a little bit more about fighting than you do!
permalinkparent
[ ]TheMarxMan 11 points 2 hours ago
Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so no living man could best him
in the ring of honor!
permalinkparent
[ ]MY_LITTLE_ORIFICE 4 points 1 hour ago

GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH!!! blam blam booooom Teleleft! Mmmmmaggots! boom Wudda w


udda! Go go go! rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr booom
permalinkparent
[ ]fakeuserisreal [score hidden] 41 minutes ago
Then he used his fight money to buy two of every animal, herded them onto a boat
, and beat the crap out of 'em.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FlatheadBayonet 5 points 2 hours ago
When you can balance a tack hammer on your head, you will head off your foes wit
h a balanced attack.
permalinkparent
[ ]RussellG2000 3 points 2 hours ago
Relevant training video from the Sphinx
permalinkparent
[ ]lonelynights [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
The more I know about my enemy, the less certain I am of where the hell he is -Quantum General
permalinkparent
[ ]iwerson2 1 point 2 hours ago
You forgot the last line:
"Today is the Opposite Day ??"
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]ManOfLaBook 205 points 5 hours ago
They were also experts at luring their enemies into a trap. Thinking the Mongols
were retreating, the enemy would follow them only to find themselves surrounded
by the main force.
permalink
[ ]jibbodahibbo 182 points 3 hours ago
classic starcraft strategy. Never over chase down a retreating army with your wh
ole army without knowing whats in the fog of war.
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 139 points 3 hours ago
Tanks. It's always tanks.
permalinkparent
[ ]TargetQ2 31 points 1 hour ago
Burrowed banelings. Every time. "Oh, your 3 units are going to kill my 20? Oh, o
kay, GG"
permalinkparent
[ ]A_Gentle_Taco 9 points 1 hour ago
And I was like "Banelings, Banelings, Banelings OH!" I was like "Banelings Banel
ings Banelings Nooo!"
permalinkparent
[ ]smallpoly [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
"Explode on me like walking mines."
permalinkparent
[ ]AMA_about_Turtles 1 point 1 hour ago
Scan as you attack.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]redw04 4 points 1 hour ago
Or Ultralisk-Mutalisk combo, that's how I get em'
permalinkparent
[ ]hillcrestwest 73 points 2 hours ago
Aka the retard magnet
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 4 points 1 hour ago
How have I never seen that.. this is great.
permalinkparent

load more comments (8 replies)


[ ]Phospholipids 7 points 3 hours ago
Baneling mines! Sploosh! I can hear the sound of marine dying.
permalinkparent
[ ]SteampunkPirate 10 points 2 hours ago
Banelings, banelings, banelings, ooooh...
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]chaosgoblyn [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Genghis Khan actually developed most of his strategies by playing Starcraft.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cforq 42 points 2 hours ago
That was actually a fairly common tactic. Also having part of your front line re
treat in order to create an opening to flank the enemy.
Though most people think of retreat as "run away" (or at least run to the next f
ortified position) through most of history retreat was moving backwards for tact
ical advantage and very organized.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 14 points 1 hour ago
the tactic was common especially even amongst the Turks and Franks, but the disc
ipline of the Mongols helped it work more often than it failed. When morale was
low however, it led to an actual retreat, explaining why the Mongols lost in Syr
ia against the Mamelukes.
permalinkparent
[ ]KapiTod 8 points 1 hour ago
The Normans and the Battle of Hasting is a classic example for those less versed
in military history.
The Saxons held a perfect position on top of the hill, for a mostly infantry for
ce this was perfect for stopping devastating armoured cavalry charges. The Norma
ns charged up and after a scuffle pretended to be in full retreat, enough of the
Saxons (including most of the Huscarls) charged after them, when they were on t
he plain the knights turned and cut them down. After that it was pretty much mop
ping up.
permalinkparent
[ ]kataskopo [score hidden] 48 minutes ago
Aww yisss I love this thread.
Also, have you heard the Dan Carlin podcast about the Mongols? Shit's so grim I
had to stop after the 12th "and then they killed, raped and pillaged everything
in sight. Then they burned it"
permalinkparent
[ ]creedencecr 2 points 1 hour ago
at that point its not longer a retreat but a rout
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 2 points 1 hour ago
Well, not always. If it was always it would never work. Armies are also routinel
y actually routed and retreat, organized or not.
permalinkparent
[ ]Mersaul 1 point 1 hour ago
Because when it's not a retreat, it's a rout.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]levon14 19 points 2 hours ago
Never chase a Singed.
permalinkparent
[ ]BabaGurGur 21 points 1 hour ago
Well now that every champion and their mothers has 30 gap closers..
Chase the Singed.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)

[ ]camieman10 1 point 1 hour ago


Or Udyr
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 10 points 2 hours ago
The Normans (French Vikings) did that In Hastings. I think Hannibal did somethin
g similar in Cannae
permalinkparent
[ ]Blizzaldo 11 points 2 hours ago
Hannibal didn't retreat. The Roman line pushed him back because his line was wea
k sauce.
permalinkparent
[ ]alekzander01 12 points 2 hours ago
Oh right.
Still, similar idea, he wanted it pushed back
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]stoirtap 2 points 1 hour ago
This worked on multiple levels. Eventually, when their enemies learned that you
shouldn't chase the retreating Mongols, the Mongols could go on raids more easil
y knowing that no army would chase them.
permalinkparent
[ ]StoicGunner 1 point 1 hour ago
Rommel pulled this same trick on allied forces in Africa.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]reddit887 202 points 3 hours ago
Dan Carlins Hardcore history. Its all a 5 part audio book about the rise and fal
l of the Mongols. Highly reccommend
permalink
[ ]bigcat318 27 points 2 hours ago
Came here to say this. And it's free!
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 14 points 2 hours ago
At least for now. Older shows are archived and sold. Still very very cheap, but
no longer free.
permalinkparent
[ ]Friskykiwi 9 points 1 hour ago
It's like $1 so it's totally worth it. I don't blame him. He does a lot of work
for those podcast he makes.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 2 points 1 hour ago
$1 /u/changetip
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]iny0urend0 6 points 1 hour ago
I've basically been assuming that all these TILs have been spurred by everybody
listening to Hardcore History all of a sudden.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Masterb8 6 points 1 hour ago
where is it available?
permalinkparent
[ ]meechu 2 points 1 hour ago
Here!
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 2 points 1 hour ago
http://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/

Wrath of Khan 1 -5. Just right click the download button and save as.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]S_A_R_C_A_S_M_B_O_T 1 point 1 hour ago
I'll check that out! Have you watched the "Crash Course World History" on the Mo
ngols? I found it to be unexpectedly comprehensive given its short time.
permalinkparent
[ ]xa3D 1 point 1 hour ago
Add Conn Iggulden's Khan series too.
permalinkparent
[ ]machu_pikacchu 1 point 1 hour ago
First thing I thought of as well. His account of Subutai's "scouting" of Europe
is amazing.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Nihilio 155 points 3 hours ago
If you like history checkout Dan Carlin's series on mongols "Wrath of the Khans"
. It will blow you mind how bad ass (or ruthless and murderous) mongolians were.
permalink
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 103 points 3 hours ago
Mongol conquests fascinate me - I also have a tshirt with Gengis Khan that I bou
ght in Mongolia. Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t
shirt in the 2800s...but then I start thinking about horse archers and forget ab
out that issue.
permalinkparent
[ ]GeeJo 56 points 2 hours ago
And the very first of Carlin's Hardcore History podcasts (Alexander vs Hitler) w
as on exactly this topic.
What chips away through the ages is the part of that man s history, deeds, charact
er, that would have balanced out the romance and the drama for us, right? People
like A. B. Bosworth want you to remember the dead. He wants you to remember the
people whose lives were snuffed out because this man lived. The certainly tens
of thousands, perhaps hundreds of thousands, of people whose lives were adversel
y affected because of Alexander the Great. We don t think about that much any more
. 2400 years has a way of dulling all that.
And it got me thinking about the worst person I could think of
Adolf Hitler. Wor
st person I could think of; most evil individual I could think of. And I started
thinking: Well, how bad is Alexander compared to someone like Adolf Hitler? Bec
ause if you were going to have a contest for, like, Worst Human Being of All Time ,
Adolf s in the running, isn t he? Certainly top ten, right? Well, people like A. B.
Bosworth want you to think of Alexander not as he seems in all of the wonderful
legends that have been handed down to us. Remember, Alexander actually had a st
aff of people who would walk round behind him, writing good things about him a p
ress corps and feeding them back to the home-town papers. Because, in Greece, he
was unpopular. They didn t think of him as The Great ; they thought of him as a tyra
nt and a barbarian. Just like his dad. It was, as I said, the Romans who tagged
on that The Great title after him. [...]
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Eh. Every conqueror has had an excuse, a reason, a higher cause. In the end they
had no empathy for the screaming masses. These same personalities exist today,
only in countries like ours they're forced to conceal it a little bit differentl
y. The game changed. People are the same. I don't care what their reasons were,
if there's a hell they all belong there.
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Likes_Information 14 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about Tiger II Panzers and decide a Hitler t-shir
t isn't so bad.

permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 3 points 1 hour ago
Fuck the Tiger II, everyone knows that the Panzer III Ausf. L is the sexiest bea
st known to mankind.
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 2 points 1 hour ago
Sometimes I ask myself if it would not be like wearing Hitler t-shirt in the 280
0s...but then I start thinking about the Me-262 and decide a Hitler t-shirt isn'
t so bad.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 7 points 1 hour ago
you know its already a thing with Hitler too. The Nazis fashionable uniforms giv
e them a popularity they definitely would otherwise lack amongst college intelle
ctuals, one of their political foes in Germany during the 1930s. The glamour of
warfare excites something in mankind (emphasis on the men too). It's a pity that
we forget about the smallfolk
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 3 points 1 hour ago
To be honest World War II makes something like 90% of the history that I read ab
out, something fascinating about those dark times.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, it's probably worse than wearing a Hitler t-shirt, but you go ahead an
d rock it anyway.
permalinkparent
[ ]Its_me_not_caring 1 point 1 hour ago
I would not say its worse. Being part of Mongolian empire once you got conquered
and are paying taxes does not seem so terrible. Occupied German territories, no
t nice.
Then again that sacking of Baghdad.
Well....at least I do not wear read CCCP (thats USSR for the non-cyrilic readers
out there) shirts.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]Tatsumi 17 points 2 hours ago
This a million times over. The way Dan speaks when he does these Hardcore Histor
y episodes is so engaging, I defy anyone to listen to the first episode of "Wrat
h of the Khans" and not fall in love.
permalinkparent
[ ]icu_ 7 points 1 hour ago
Love everything Dan does, but this was especially epic. Such an interesting piec
e of history that is not explored to any degree in traditional US schooling. He
frames things so well and really keeps you interest. His own enthusiasm is infec
tious.
Also, if anyone wants to try their hand at horse archery I recommend trying out
Mount & Blade: Warband (PC).
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]zapbark[??] 4 points 2 hours ago
Crash Course History's episode on the Mongol's is also very good:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
Link to the first (of 5) episodes.
I've actually been listening to it for the third time in a couple of years right
now, got to the 4th episode yesterday, I'm still just as amazed every time I he
ar it and just can't get enough of Dan Carlin's cadence and ability to make you
listen.

permalinkparent
[ ]awfulmemory 2 points 2 hours ago
I'm so glad you included that part in the parenthesis. To many people glorify th
ose awful pillaging dickheads.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 1038 points 5 hours ago*
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians. It's like, fool, you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being
barbarians. Genghis Khan and his generals were very clever strategists, highly
skilled at finding methods of psychological warfare before that was really a cod
ified practice. *They were brutal as all fuck and used tricks to strike fear int
o the populaces they were invading. It worked.
(Edit just for u haters. Loves ya keep on hatin.)
permalink
[ ]emergent_properties 510 points 4 hours ago
I tend to have a laugh when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of
barbarians.
Enemies love it when you underestimate them.
That's probably why they enjoyed having that image.
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 44 points 2 hours ago
They wanted people to overestimate them, because they were outnumbered all the t
ime. That is why they were so brutal, and when they invaded cities most of the t
ime everyone would immediately surrender because of the mongols' reputation. If
they were underestimated they wouldn't have been successful at all.
permalinkparent
[ ]oykno 5 points 1 hour ago
This should be top comment
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 1 point 1 hour ago
ikr
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]Funslinger 173 points 3 hours ago
it didn't work out so well later when they were holding their dominion of China
and the proud Chinese still thought they were being ruled by barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 365 points 2 hours ago
To be fair the Chinese consider pretty much everyone else barbarians too
permalinkparent
[ ]xHelpless 122 points 2 hours ago
Which gave them a pretty big surprise when they fought the British Empire.
permalinkparent
[ ]Yanto5 122 points 1 hour ago
barbarians! in bright red uniforms, in disciplined ranks and with guns!
permalinkparent
[ ]sygnus 11 points 1 hour ago
With boats that have cannons on them, can float against both current and wind, m
ade with iron!
permalinkparent
[ ]I_RAPE_PEOPLE_II 31 points 1 hour ago
With the greatest empire stretching across the entire planet, with a larger navy
than any country at that point in history.
permalinkparent
[ ]dbcanuck 19 points 1 hour ago
The sun never sets on the British Empire... even all the way through WWII.
Think, it took two world wars to eventually bankrupt them into a gradual decolon
ization. WWI wasn't enough; the empire was battered, but still intact come 1939.
permalinkparent

[ ]muchu [score hidden] 52 minutes ago


And the sun still never sets on the British Empire! https://upload.wikimedia.org
/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/British_Overseas.png/1002px-British_Overseas.png
permalinkparent
[ ]eskjcSFW [score hidden] 40 minutes ago
TIL that Britain owns the antarctic penis
permalinkparent
continue this thread
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]geek_loser 54 points 1 hour ago
Then again you tend to not think straight when you're high as fuck all the time.
permalinkparent
[ ]Facticity [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Thanks to the barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Aiwatcher [score hidden] 38 minutes ago
From Opium that the British got them hooked on
permalinkparent
[ ]alfrednugent 4 points 1 hour ago
Not thinking straight might have helped some Viking Berserkers.
permalinkparent
[ ]Freshwaterocean 11 points 1 hour ago
They still considered the British barbarians. So unrefined on unclean.
permalinkparent
[ ]Holy90 [score hidden] 45 minutes ago
Manc here, seems fair.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne 1 point 1 hour ago
Can you explain a little bit more of what you mean?
permalinkparent
[ ]s1ugg0 5 points 1 hour ago
Aside of which has already been stated about the Opium wars; the Boxer Rebellion
could be seen as a small microcosm of the events of the time.
50,000 soldiers from European Powers, Russia, and the US soundly defeated approx
imately 400,000 Chinese troops. They forced the Chinese to execute government of
ficials who had supported the Boxers, provisions for foreign troops to be statio
ned in Beijing, and 450 million taels of silver to be paid to the allies. More t
han the government's annual tax revenue.
Nations that spend most of their time saying how great they are often have the r
ug pulled out from underneath them harshly. It's something we in the US should b
e mindful of. History has repeated this pattern time and time and time again.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Cthuluman 3 points 1 hour ago
Basically, research the opium wars, it essentially was the story about how a civ
ilisation who believe they are the only good civilisation had that image of thei
rs shattered after humiliation after humiliation.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Apology_Panda 3 points 1 hour ago
During the opium wars (1839 - 1842) the Chinese got a rude wake up call at how b
ehind they were in terms of technology. British ships that had made full use of
the industrial revolution destroyed outdated Chinese ships very quickly. They ha
d shut themselves off from the world a few centuries before, when they decided t
hey (the Chinese) were a master race that didn't need to explore or trade with a
nyone.
Topped with the Brits having guns and other weapons that far exceeded anything t
he Chinese had, the Opium Wars ended quickly, and China came under British contr
ol, which would lead to many revolts, and opium drug problems for nearly the nex

t century.
permalinkparent
[ ]ottovonbizmarkie 3 points 1 hour ago
Shutting themselves out would not necessarily have been worse at the time than b
eing open. India was open to trade and the British exploited it to take it over.
The Chinese Emperors basically saw that and thought, we don't want to fall for
the same mistake. China was never technically part of a European Empire, so I wo
uld say that it fared better than India.
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Sorry I didn't make those points clear, but you're absolutely right.
permalinkparent
[ ]sheerstress [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
I like how you note the chinese of believing themselves to be a master race as t
he British and other western countries are going around taking slave colonies an
d committing attrocities to other nations
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]heroyi 1 point 1 hour ago
Source?
Curious about that part of history. Seems like an entertaining read
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (21 replies)
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 79 points 2 hours ago*
Actually it was the Greeks that coined "Barbarians".
Anyone who didn't speak their language sounded animal-like to them; so they woul
d call them men who just go "Bar Bar Bar Bar" which evolved into "BarBarians". I
t's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.
Although, yes Chinese did think of Mongols as stupid savages. Until they showed
up with an entire army on horseback and started wiping them out systematically.
Smart thing about having your entire people on horseback is that you can settle
anywhere temporarily, and you can get all the meat, skin, and milk you need from
the female horses. The horses also can hold a lot more arrows than you can.
You can literally set up base anywhere if you don't mind sleeping outside in mak
e-shift tents. It's like a moving nation where everyone has +10 speed modifier a
nd unlimited reloads on your arrows. Visualise a proud house cat fighting a bee
swarm.
permalinkparent
[ ]Levarien 6 points 1 hour ago
The term was even used by city states against other greeks. Athenians considered
Greeks from Macedonia and Epirus to be barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 2 points 1 hour ago
We still do as a matter of fact!
permalinkparent
[ ]Akumetsu33 15 points 1 hour ago
Mongols don't get their entrails ripped out after loosing an arrow. More like a
proud house cat fighting hornets. Or Japanese hornets, these fuckers.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]MadNhater 9 points 1 hour ago
All roads lead to Civilization.
permalinkparent
[ ]renderless 2 points 1 hour ago
Not anywhere, only on the steppes is that really possible.
permalinkparent
[ ]SimonArr 2 points 1 hour ago
It's a straight diss to anyone who wasn't Greek.

Not really a diss. It was just the word for "foreigner" and the word "?e???" tha
t in modern greek means "foreigner", meant "Greek from other city state".
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 4 points 2 hours ago
Romans, not Greeks.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 13 points 1 hour ago
Maybe someone gave you bad information (no big deal, it happens);
The term originates from the Greek word ??a??? (barbaros).
This led to the Greek idiom (pas me Hellen barbaros) which literally means "whoe
ver is not Greek is a barbarian".
permalinkparent
[ ]Confusedandlost123 8 points 1 hour ago
the concept on language an use as was described, was the Romans co-opting a gree
k word.
the Bar Bar Bar thing was roman.
permalinkparent
[ ]GoodGuyGoodGuy 7 points 1 hour ago
Okay I'll concede that it was Roman co-opting "Barbaros" into "Barbarian". I see
where you're coming from. Romans coined the word, but it's Greek in source. Goo
d catch.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 1 hour ago
Ah you're right. My etymologies just weren't going back far enough.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]alfrednugent 1 point 1 hour ago
NO! It was the The Beach Boys that first recorded the classic Barbara Ann
Kidding!!!
IIRC the Romans were talking about the Germans when they said their language sou
nded like "bar bar bar"
permalinkparent
load more comments (5 replies)
[ ]Gatorboy4life 27 points 2 hours ago
What about Dave?
permalinkparent
[ ]Hershey-kisses 39 points 2 hours ago
Especially Dave
permalinkparent
[ ]MartyrXLR 2 points 1 hour ago
Ba-ba. Barbarian. Ba-ba. Barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]AlekRivard 4 points 2 hours ago
And Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]ShadyD 21 points 2 hours ago
Fuck Kevin
permalinkparent
[ ]tilsitforthenommage 5 points 2 hours ago
Fucking barbarian
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]zyzzogeton 1 point 2 hours ago
Kevin!
permalinkparent
[ ]stln00b 1 point 1 hour ago
Well fuck you too!
/goes back to /r/Dave.

permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]unforgiven91 1 point 1 hour ago
He's huge, but a wimp.
permalinkparent
[ ]runetrantor 1 point 2 hours ago
So like Europe back then?
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 2 hours ago
Like the greeks, romans, etc.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 2 points 2 hours ago
Never said it was Sino-specific
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
Don't know what that means, but I was just saying, not trying to correct you or
anything.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah I hear ya
permalinkparent
[ ]digitoba 1 point 1 hour ago
So what does sino-specific means?
permalinkparent
[ ]falafelsizing 1 point 1 hour ago
'Sino' refers to China, as in 'First Sino-Japanese War.' So, Sino-specific means
specific to China.
permalinkparent
[ ]dolphin2k2 1 point 1 hour ago
Where as the Manchu's were able to hold on to the ruling for a long time. The di
fference is the attempt at integration that the mongol failed at.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoeticGopher 1 point 1 hour ago
I mean the Mongols held on ~years, the Manchus were only there around 300.
permalinkparent
load more comments (18 replies)
[ ]RainOnDrums 32 points 2 hours ago
Chinese used the term barbarian to describe most foreigners, particularly any co
ming from the west like Indians or others on the silk road.
permalinkparent
[ ]IdeaHamster 22 points 2 hours ago
Well, that would make sense seeing as the word "barbarian" literally means "fore
igner".
permalinkparent
[ ]Funslinger 23 points 2 hours ago
well, it literally means someone who speaks gibberish. which then, in turn, mean
s people who speak a different language.
permalinkparent
[ ]kjj92 2 points 2 hours ago
Chinese here. The word barbarian in Chinese is written as "?", which essentially
means "foreigner". That been said, it is always used in conjunction with anothe
r word "?", which means barbaric. So together the word "??" means "barbaric fore
igner".
permalinkparent
load more comments (8 replies)
[ ]ipretendiamacat 4 points 2 hours ago
Brabarians is good label for conquering, not such a good label for ruling.
permalinkparent
[ ]StatesideKopite 28 points 1 hour ago
Brabarians is an even better label for women who refuse to wear bras.

permalinkparent
[ ]Crossfiyah 3 points 1 hour ago
Bra-bare-ians.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]h34dyr0kz 3 points 2 hours ago
Well to be fair they treated the Chinese like they were barbarians.
permalinkparent
[ ]Hatman2413 10 points 2 hours ago
did they? i thought the later Mongols kinda respected Chinese culture
permalinkparent
[ ]vanillaacid 5 points 2 hours ago
Not only respected, but integrated. Not all of course, but many.
permalinkparent
[ ]BitcoinSantaClaus 1 point 1 hour ago
Remember the K"HAN" dynasty? ;)
permalinkparent
[ ]batia0121 0 points 2 hours ago
They did adopt Chinese political system the day they started ruling, but they al
so classified the entire population into 4 classes.
Mongols
Other "barbarians"
Northern Chinese/Koreans
Southern Chinese
The last 2 classes are basically slaves.
permalinkparent
[ ]shaykezors 1 point 2 hours ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kublai_Khan
permalinkparent
[ ]owlbi 1 point 2 hours ago
It did work pretty well though? They ruled China long enough to be considered a
legit dynasty (Yuan Dynasty).
permalinkparent
[ ]ReV-Whack 36 points 2 hours ago
The mongolians tiny horses didn't help matters either. The enemy would underesti
mate them & chase them only to realize those tiny horses had a funky trot that a
llowed them to just...keep...going... and going some more.
The enemies would inevitability tire & the tiny unyielding horses would come in
for the slaughter.
permalinkparent
[ ]Monteze 23 points 2 hours ago
Aint no one fuck with tiny horses no more. Aint no one.
permalinkparent
[ ]canoe123 1 point 1 hour ago
Li'l Sebastian!
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]MrMastodon 1 point 1 hour ago
There's something to be said for having the capacity to be barbaric as well.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Surabaya-Jim 90 points 3 hours ago
Genghis Khan also encouraged the development of a Mongolian alphabet and literac
y, the first Mongolian written law and used Uighur advisers to build up a functi
oning administration based on this law.
permalinkparent
[ ]kootrell 88 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion. Actually when he wasn't raping
, murdering and plundering he was a rather progressive guy.

permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 123 points 2 hours ago
Not to mention his policy of freedom of religion.
Dan Carlin explained this as a sort of religious 'insurance'. The Mongols weren'
t the most religious people, but they figured that if someone else had the "righ
t" gods, they sure as hell didn't want to piss them off. So by letting everyone
keep worshiping their own gods, it will keep those gods (if any) happy and let t
he Mongols keep doing their thing. And it keeps the conquered peoples happier to
o.
TL;DR: Even religious freedom was a thought-out tactic of conquest.
permalinkparent
[ ]lajoi 14 points 2 hours ago
I'm really skeptical of that claim of Carlin's. I don't remember him sourcing it
and it sounds much more like pragmatic religious toleration than collecting all
the religions and hoping one is right.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 3 points 1 hour ago
Honestly, I don't remember exactly how he worded this, but I never really though
t of it as a claim of his. He often presents things as opinion, and he usually t
ells you that it comes from his own personal interpretation and not from any fac
ts found in the literature. This is why he also tells us that he does not consid
er himself a professional historian. But I thought the exact same thing as you w
hen he brought this up. I'll take it a step further and say that Ghengis seemed
to me to be mocking religion. I sincerely doubt that he was concerned with the a
nger of God, or any gods.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Words_are_Windy 2 points 1 hour ago
He put forth both as explanations, but you're right, the latter claim does sound
more like speculation on the part of Carlin.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]atacms 2 points 2 hours ago
I heard it was more like they didn't give a shit as long as they were getting th
eir taxes collected.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]ProjectD13X 4 points 2 hours ago
That and they had some pretty damn strict laws in their empire. Not very progres
sive at all.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]DarkApostleMatt 1 point 2 hours ago
Didn't some of the migrating Germanic tribes do something similar around the tim
e Rome was going down the drain?
permalinkparent
[ ]TheRighteousTyrant 1 point 1 hour ago
Sounds like "Pascal's Wager" is a misnomer because Genghis Khan figured that shi
t out ages before.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]LongLiveTheCat 2 points 1 hour ago
And a policy of murder-raping whole cities to death.
permalinkparent
[ ]2hunter 1 point 1 hour ago
Yep, also credited with the invention of modern mail for this reason. The act of
writing a message, and having someone deliver it to a general on the battlefiel
d to convey intel had never been done previously.
permalinkparent

load more comments (2 replies)


[ ]the_rabble_alliance 104 points 3 hours ago
you don't conquer half of Asia's land area by being barbarians
Too bad Lithuanian (HRE) got in the way.
http://i.imgur.com/Z8me2A8.jpg
permalinkparent
[ ]cooljacob204sfw 63 points 3 hours ago
I have spent the past week playing this game with 2 friends and we now are on a
sleep schedule of sleep at 7am getting up at 3pm. This game has destroyed my win
ter break life. 10/10
permalinkparent
[ ]NimX3 66 points 3 hours ago
Still sleeping 8 hours a day? You're fine.
permalinkparent
[ ]OldLeopardSkin 11 points 2 hours ago
Just don't sleep one day and then go sleep whenever you like the next day
permalinkparent
[ ]lukasz90 1 point 1 hour ago
I've played Paradox games for disgusting amounts of time in one session. As long
as your feet haven't swollen and developed a blood clot, you're fine bruh.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]FactimusMaximus 27 points 3 hours ago
Don't hate me now, but I don't know the game you got that pic from
permalinkparent
[ ]the_rabble_alliance 34 points 3 hours ago
http://www.europauniversalis4.com/
permalinkparent
[ ]konzine 15 points 2 hours ago
Is it any good?
permalinkparent
[ ]GD7901 22 points 2 hours ago
Very.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 12 points 2 hours ago
What is the difference between CK and EU? Which do you prefer? Same developer, r
ight?
permalinkparent
[ ]Arathnorn 17 points 2 hours ago
CK is character focused and is great at generating stories, EU is more empire fo
cused.
permalinkparent
[ ]alaricus 14 points 2 hours ago
Where CK is dynastic, and a little less "traditional," this one is a little more
straightforward from the outset. You play a nation, rather than a lord. The dip
lomatic system is way less complex, but everything else is way deeper. The games
' interfaces are very simmilar, in terms of unit/province management, but what y
ou do beyond that is, again, much more complex.
There was a joke review that hit the nail on the head pretty well when it said t
hat you play a wizard guiding a nation. You get three kinds of mana to either sp
end on technology, or just administration within the country.
I prefer CK2, personally, because it makes for better narrative, but as I ahve g
otten better at CK2, EU takes up more of my time, as it presents a better challe
nge right now.
Starts in at the Hundred Years War and goes throught the Age of Exploration, bas
ically until the Industrial Revolution.
permalinkparent
[ ]RonanNoodles 4 points 2 hours ago
Interesting. I'm a huge fan of CK, too, but I've been struggling with keeping re
alm strong and within my family line when passing to the heir. I always start pr

etty strong, but near the end, my empire is all over the place!
permalinkparent
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
CK2 is about embracing failure.
You are going to reach lofty, lofty heights (I went from a single county in Croa
tia to ruling the Byzantine Empire within a few hundred years) and then epic col
lapses (I ended up with a duchy on the ass-end of the Byzantine Empire and didn'
t survive the endless Turkic invasions) with many ups and downs in-between.
The Big Huge Empire part of CK2 is actually quite tedious, stressful, and has yo
u playing the game at a slow pace in order to manage everything. Between rebelli
ous vassals and big events like Jihads that end up targeting the bigger states,
failure is almost inevitable.
Plus, once you transfer your savegame from CK2 to EU4, do you really want to sta
rt as a Byzantium that has re-established the Roman Empire, with Italy, the Balk
ans, Asia Minor, the Levant, and North Africa already under your sway? EU4 is tr
ivial at that point.
permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 2 points 1 hour ago
I always find it a struggle to grow at a manageable rate. It's easy to become a
superpower, but if you do it too fast your empire is going to crumble in a matte
r of months. It is really difficult to grow at a pace that ensures you are going
to be able to keep everything. Also, female rulers who are attractive, just, ki
nd and are masters of seduction are great for keeping all your male vassals happ
y (95% of your vassals). I almost breed exclusively for them.
permalinkparent
[ ]DirtySketel 1 point 2 hours ago
Each game of the genre they make is set in a different time period, and the mech
anics are often very different to reflect the elements of that period they want
to bring out. So in CK2, it's dynasties and family politics, weddings and murder
plots (basically GoT) as you command your little armies about the map. EU4 is p
retty much a pure 'map painting' game. This is the age of exploration, European
nations will end up controlling large swathes of the world. There is no family p
olitics in this one. Victoria 2 (my favourite) is less about map painting and mo
re about nation building. This game has very detailed economics and population m
odelling and is about the different social movements and ideologies that were fi
ghting it out at the time. Hearts Of Iron 3 is just an enormously detailed simul
ation of a single conflict. V2 and HoI are significantly more complex than EU4 a
nd CK2 (the easiest for beginners).
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]poro_from_leeds 3 points 2 hours ago
I bought CK2 because somebody told me this, didn't enjoy it at all because I did
n't know wtf to do. Is this any better/easier to get into?
permalinkparent
[ ]ionsquare 6 points 2 hours ago*
Over the weekend I tried to play CK2 because one of my friends has been raving a
bout it and bought me some DLC to guilt me into playing it (I had the base game
from ages ago but never played it).
We went on teamspeak and did some screencasting so he could explain stuff to me.
He went on about how things worked for literally hours and I still have no idea
what to do. I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son
to supplant me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
It looks really neat and I'm sure will be awesome once I know enough to break in
to it. I've heard the replayability is amazing and each game is memorable and un
ique. Could be a dangerous time-sink if I do get into it though.
Edit: I think the trick is to not be too worried about getting everything right
the first time. Just start with the tutorial and sort of guess at what to do and
you'll learn by accident as you go. My friend has logged almost 300 hours and i
s still learning new stuff all the time.
permalinkparent

[ ]JohnnyOnslaught 11 points 2 hours ago


I killed my brother to inherit his stuff before he could have a son to supplant
me as heir though, so that was pretty cool.
Sounds like you've figured it out. Have fun!
permalinkparent
[ ]JoshuaIan 2 points 1 hour ago
700 hours + here for me and there's a crap ton of mechanics I don't really know
yet
permalinkparent
[ ]YoohooCthulhu 2 points 1 hour ago
The thing that's cool about the game is you don't learn it all at once. I've bee
n playing it for a couple years now and I'm still figuring out new things I can
do, tactics I can use, etc. The game's also updated with DLC on a pretty regular
basis so new mechanics appear in the game.
permalinkparent
[ ]loligol 2 points 1 hour ago
It's also helpful to not start out as a huge empire, say the king of France.
Because you're not starting from scratch as in say CIV, there's a huge differenc
e in complexity (and power) of starting positions.
I think one of the Irish independents are often recommended as a starting point.
They're small enough to understand what's going on, and you don't have a king c
alling you to war or invading you right away.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sexygrizzly 2 points 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MAvJJuv1hvM&list=PLH-huzMEgGWBBUYoAjpLxFkbgFw19C
eA_
It's a great playthrough tuto by a well known youtuber in the comunity. He plays
as an easy country an explain really well. If you're interested, it's he best w
ay to get an idea of the game.
Here's one for EU4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HS2xIh2tR0U
permalinkparent
[ ]poro_from_leeds 1 point 1 hour ago
Between CKII, EU4 and HOI, which one do you think is easier?
permalinkparent
[ ]western78 2 points 1 hour ago
Not HOI, I love it, but it probably has the steepest learning curve of any of th
eir games . I would probably say EU4 would be the one to start with, as it is a
bit more of a straightforward strategy game. CK2 is amazing, but getting used to
the dynastic politics can be tricky at first.
permalinkparent
[ ]shadowmask 3 points 1 hour ago
EU4<CK2<<<<<<<<<<<<<HOI
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]NewToYou2 10 points 2 hours ago
It's quite good if you like the genre. 4X with a lot of detail. If you, like nea
rly everyone else, get the "Just One More Turn" syndrome when playing Civ 5, and
complexity doesn't scare you, you may find Europa Universalis dangerously addic
tive.
permalinkparent
[ ]14Mtime 3 points 2 hours ago
It's good, but I don't consider it great, from my basic understanding (90 hours)
; it's various ways to expand your blob. When at peace you're just preparing/pl
anning your next campaign. Needs more peace time things
permalinkparent
[ ]NotArkard 4 points 1 hour ago
Did you try it with any of the DLC? The good thing about the DLC in EU4 is only
the host has to have it. If you get a chance, join a game where the host has all
the DLC. It's a different experience.

Also, try playing outside of Europe. There's so much stuff to do in between wars
to make sure your nation doesn't crumble to rebels or peasants' wars that you m
ay barely get time to expand your blob.
But, yes, blob expansion is the main point. Try CK2 for more peace-focused gamep
lay.
permalinkparent
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (6 replies)
[ ]defeatedbird 2 points 1 hour ago
It's strange, I find that if you start as Poland, Lithuania, or any of the centr
al/Eastern European countries, you're going to just expand East and form Russia.
It's so much easier. Usually the western border ends up being the Oder, the Car
pathian mountains, and the Danube. Rarely is it worth the expense and effort of
expanding into Hungary and the Balkans, or dealing with the damn mess that is th
e HRE.
By contrast, if you start as France, you end up blobbing into Spain, Germany, an
d all or part of Italy. England, Spain and Portugal end up colonizing.
permalinkparent
[ ]bearwulf 1 point 1 hour ago
NSFW Borders
permalinkparent
load more comments (17 replies)
[ ]QB1 10 points 2 hours ago*
Technically, the term 'barbarian' was anyone in a tribe that was not belonging t
o one of the great civilizations of the time. Hence, yes, they were all barbaria
ns.
Also, savagely brutal. I don't think calling an enemy infantryman a 'barbarian'
is underestimating them. Fear plays a part in this as well, so while the militar
y leaders were not just raging lunatics, these forces were very much 'barbaric'.
I believe that was done for psychological effect as well, to scare enemies, a.k
.a. win before fighting.
permalinkparent
[ ]FactimusMaximus 3 points 2 hours ago
That was part of it really. Knowing how brutal they were and all the stories of
crazy stuff they had done made them incredibly intimidating. Intimidation is the
bedrock of psychological war.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 36 points 2 hours ago
half of Asia's land area
They also almost conquered Eastern Europe twice. When they got serious, they alm
ost conquered the whole thing, but had to stop when the Khan died. The mongols w
ere no freaking joke.
permalinkparent
[ ]dillivered 2 points 1 hour ago
And most of Europe was, back then. The Empire still had sound battle tactics and
advancements, but they could be exploited because of their internal and geopoli
tical situation, just like most of China. Everyone else was a mixed bag.
permalinkparent
load more comments (9 replies)
[ ]hoosierstateofmind 31 points 2 hours ago
They conquered a good portion of Eastern Europe/The Caucauses with a scouting pa
rty. A SCOUTING PARTY!
permalinkparent
[ ]fuuuuckckckckck 5 points 2 hours ago
Source
permalinkparent
[ ]phynn 5 points 1 hour ago
Hardcore History. Granted, said "scouting party" that was probably comparable to
most European armies at the time and they were all cavalry... But still...

permalinkparent
[ ]stillclub [score hidden] 33 minutes ago
god that was a good series
permalinkparent
[ ]Perrette 3 points 1 hour ago
The secret history of the mongols
permalinkparent
[ ]SupermAndrew1 2 points 1 hour ago
Dan carlins podcast
permalinkparent
[ ]thatoneguy889 3 points 1 hour ago
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mongol_invasions_of_Georgia
permalinkparent
[ ]KroganElite 4 points 1 hour ago
also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Kalka_River
permalinkparent
[ ]Erythmos 7 points 1 hour ago
It was a 15,000 mounted "scouting party" though.
permalinkparent
[ ]N8CCRG4 4 points 1 hour ago
I mean, nobody had standing armies. So basically all you needed was someone who
was familiar with military training and you could take out any little militia of
farmers.
permalinkparent
[ ]MrFakePoets 7 points 2 hours ago
Also they used biological warfare. They just throw corpses over castle walls usi
ng catapults. Source
permalinkparent
[ ]leshake 22 points 2 hours ago
Barbarian doesn't mean they are bad at war. It implies they lack civility.
permalinkparent
[ ]OnTheCanRightNow 11 points 1 hour ago
Strictly speaking, it means they're not Greek, you barbarian.
permalinkparent
[ ]idontlikeyouguy 3 points 1 hour ago
Fool, they had marco polo and the blind guy.
permalinkparent
[ ]logic_card 3 points 1 hour ago
when people say that the Mongolians were just a horde of barbarians
Who says that?
Every army used psychological warfare, deception, ruses and so forth. Mongol suc
cess is due to mass cavalry tactics against armies which although larger were mo
stly infantry and after only a few decades they had adapted to Mongol tactics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Ain_Jalut
permalinkparent
[ ]koxar 3 points 2 hours ago
a barbarian and a clever strategist are not mutually exclusive
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 2 points 1 hour ago
They were barbarians in the sense of cultural impact they had. Many of the regio
ns they invaded reverted back to their previous ways within a hundred years. Loo
king at Roman and Greek influence we can still see it 2000 years later.
permalinkparent
[ ]strawboy1230 2 points 1 hour ago
Well the term came about because 'invaders' were often termed 'barbarians' in an
attempt to dehumanize them as these marauding bands of savages and fools. ...It
's just something that you do so you can separate yourself from the enemy. Later
on people just adopted it into colloquial speech.
permalinkparent
[ ]conto1 2 points 1 hour ago

Teenage historian sets the record straight on the mongols!


permalinkparent
[ ]409pm 2 points 1 hour ago
They were employing never before seen calvary tactics so numbers were not so imp
ortant.
permalinkparent
[ ]goshuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
"barbarian" is a word used by butthurt defeated sides.
also, "horde" comes from turkic/mongolian word of "orda/ordu", which means army.
permalinkparent
[ ]Targun 1 point 2 hours ago
They didn't build anything, they didn't discover anything. They were only good i
n wrecking shit up. That doesn't make you civilized.
permalinkparent
[ ]Johnny_bubblegum 1 point 2 hours ago
Having the greatest horseriders the world will ever see was probably also neat.
permalinkparent
[ ]The_Great_Solomon 1 point 2 hours ago
I think south park ruined that
permalinkparent
[ ]nasty_nater 1 point 2 hours ago
Never get involved in a land war in Asia (Unless you're Genghis Khan).
permalinkparent
[ ]zephyrtr 2 points 1 hour ago*
Watch Marco Polo, they often make jabs at how 13th century China and Europe stil
l considered the Mongols to be barbarians, even as they'd become the cultural an
d scientific center of the world
in what is present-day Beijing.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekorama 1 point 1 hour ago
I love the mongols they're the shit
permalinkparent
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
I had a history teacher that called Ghengis Khan a barbarian but spoke of Alexan
der as a god. What bugged was how he never explained why one was the other.
permalinkparent
[ ]elegant-hound 1 point 1 hour ago
they hate us cause they anus.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 1 point 1 hour ago
Was he better at that psych shit than Vlad the Impaler?
permalinkparent
load more comments (42 replies)
[ ]Bubberitt 22 points 2 hours ago
For an engaging history of the Mongols check out Dan Carlins podcast Hardcore Hi
story. His series Wrath of the Khans is great! http://www.dancarlin.com/product/
hardcore-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]another_new_username 8 points 2 hours ago
The Kahn shows were hands down my favorite Hardcore History shows. I definitely
recommend them to anyone that has a few hours to kill.
permalinkparent
[ ]spiraleclipse 77 points 4 hours ago
Well, they were the exception.
permalink
[ ]ChiTownDisplaced 32 points 3 hours ago
Thank you Crash Course!
permalinkparent
[ ]LeatherPinata 2 points 1 hour ago
trumpets blaring, kid being dragged behind a horse
permalinkparent

[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago


Thanks,I'm gonna overdose on Crash Course while humming their intro-melody.
permalinkparent
[ ]frayuk [score hidden] 52 minutes ago
I see this in every thread concerning the Mongols. What's it from? What does it
mean?
permalinkparent
load more comments (3 replies)
[ ]TakenakaHanbei 2 points 1 hour ago
Mongol-tage.
permalinkparent
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]mar10wright 73 points 5 hours ago
God Damn Mongolians!
permalink
[ ]CoolLikeAFoolinaPool 19 points 2 hours ago
Breaking down my schitty wall!!
permalinkparent
[ ]coocookuhchoo 11 points 2 hours ago
Oooo a Trojan Mongorian horse
permalinkparent
[ ]M1664H 33 points 3 hours ago
Mongorriaaaans!!!!!
permalinkparent
[ ]SJHillman 6 points 2 hours ago
KHAAAAAAN!
permalinkparent
[ ]MorreQ 11 points 2 hours ago
This always stuck with me.
A merchant spy of the Caliphate sent East, reported back to his King that there
exists a large kingdom of wast wealth and resources, cities of millions that riv
al and surpass any seen, a civilization flourishing in culture and art. And that
SOMETHING, had destroyed it all.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
"Goddamn Mongorians."
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
The account of their journey east, the series of gruesome discoveries. It had to
be the most terrifying adventure like falling into some fucked up parallel worl
d.
permalinkparent
[ ]GreyGonzales 21 points 2 hours ago
I don't think they invented them, it was probably some Chinese or Assyrian cultu
re but the Mongols definitely made great use of the stirrup. They were responsib
le for bringing it to Europe through their campaigns, appearing for the first ti
me in a 580AD Byzantine military manual. It basically allowed them to shoot from
any angle even backwards. They also used thumb rings which helped them make kil
l shots from 300yds with a range of over 600yds. And timed their shots when the
horses hooves were all in the air for greater accuracy.
They also could basically live off their horses. First off most of the horses we
re female to take advantage of them making milk. And the foals were brought alon
g to keep them lactating. Also if in a real pinch they would drink some of the h
orses blood mixed with the milk for an extra helping. They didn't kill the horse
s, in fact they were basically cherished family pets that grew up with the famil
y.
permalink
[ ]Blizzaldo 12 points 1 hour ago
They definitely killed the horses. Horse meat was a staple of their diet. They w
ould boil it and eat it, or dry it out into jerky. The jerky could be eaten on h

orseback, or mixed with milk and boiled into a dish.


permalinkparent
[ ]MuhammadIsMyMuscle 5 points 1 hour ago
I think he was trying to say they wouldn't eat their cherished war horse.
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 3 points 1 hour ago
This went from aww to aww real fast.
permalinkparent
[ ]Thorston 2 points 1 hour ago
I remember thumb rings from age of empires. Why does a ring on your thumb help y
ou soot a bow?
permalinkparent
[ ]cumfarts [score hidden] 36 minutes ago
They drew their bows by wrapping their thumbs around the string and placing the
index and middle finger over the thumb. The ring protected the skin on the thumb
.
http://www.turkishculture.org/images/page/clip_image004.jpg
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (4 replies)
[ ]Eapinacas 26 points 3 hours ago
That makes me wonder if the 5 fires thug from Marco Polo is true.
permalink
[ ]micheru12 9 points 2 hours ago
5 Fires Thug was hardcore, he trained under 100 Eyes and was originally going to
accompany 100 eyes on his mission to assassinate the cricket chancellor. Sadly,
the great Khan seems to prefer the Latin over all other subjects in the court.
:/
Shame, 5 Fires Thug was a master of Praying Mantis Style.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 10 points 2 hours ago
I just finished Marco Polo last night and I have no idea who 5 Fires Thug is. Do
you mean Byamba, Kublai's bastard son?
And Kublai most likely chose Polo because he has very good eyes, and is good at
explaining what he saw.
permalinkparent
[ ]ze_ben 14 points 1 hour ago
There is no such character. He was trying to be funny because the comment he rep
lied to misspelled thing as thug. If he had actually been funny, it would not ha
ve caused your confusion.
permalinkparent
[ ]98smithg 4 points 1 hour ago
In the last episode there is a guy who says every man should light 5 fires, I as
sume that is who it was.
permalinkparent
[ ]sfw_account_no_boobs 3 points 1 hour ago
Yea, that is Byamba
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Izzinatah 3 points 2 hours ago
I've just finished Marco Polo & I don't remember '5 Fires Thug' - who was that?
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 2 points 1 hour ago
I THINK he's talking about the moment when Marco's told to make some more fires
in their camp before the assault, so it looks like they have way more soldiers i
n their army than they actually do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]inkedexistence 6 points 2 hours ago

Yes, its a real tactic that has been used. I'm not sure if the Mongols used it,
but I know other armies have.
permalinkparent
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 59 minutes ago
The Mongols were always using tactics like this. It may be the most historically
relevant fact the show has presented.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
In Dan Carlin's podcast/audiobook, I can't remember if he mentions this but he d
efinitely talks about how each rider would typically have up to 5 horses with th
em IIRC which also made their army seem extremely large, a group of 10k people s
uddenly looks like 50k in the distance and they ALL rode on horses which where t
he fastest way of moving for a person for several thousand years, also something
that could make their army seem larger than normal because they mode so fast th
at someone may think "hold on I just saw their whole army in that other city and
now they're all the way over here, their army must be twice as big!"
permalinkparent
[ ]Alitalia 25 points 3 hours ago
A RUSE!! You big dumb idiot!
permalink
[ ]the_star_lord 11 points 2 hours ago
A ruse? Brrring, brrring. Hello. Hi, it's the 1930's. Can we have our words and
clothes and shitty airplane back?
permalinkparent
[ ]ChevySmallBlock350 7 points 1 hour ago
And watch out for that Hitler, he's a bad egg.
permalinkparent
[ ]thedude37 [score hidden] 30 minutes ago
*Adolf Hitler
permalinkparent
[ ]fischbs 2 points 1 hour ago
All of that stuff was and still is cool. No you cannot have them back.
permalinkparent
[ ]durrtyurr 7 points 2 hours ago
I believe that the way we word it today is 'Force Projection'
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 12 points 2 hours ago
Ghengis Khan sent his two best generals on a three year scouting mission with on
ly 30,000 troops. During that time they fought in over a dozen battles, never lo
st a battle, went up against arguably the best European armies with troop sizes
close to 100,000 losing minimal casualties and only stopped Ghengis ordered them
back. His generals were tactical geniuses.
permalink
[ ]bati555 8 points 1 hour ago
No kidding, when you look at the casualties on both sides, Mongols usually lost
20-1500 soldiers whereas their enemy would lose 20,000 in the same battle. Fucki
ng ridiculous.
permalinkparent
[ ]ClancysLegendaryRed 8 points 2 hours ago
Listen to the Dan Carlin Hardcore History series on these guys - Wrath of the Kh
ans.
Absolutely incredible narrative.
permalink
[ ]Plowbeast 8 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols weren't always outnumbered. Even if their opponent had greater numbe
rs strategically, Mongol mobility meant being able to quickly stage superior num
bers for a specific skirmish or battle before the enemy could properly muster.
Some of Genghis most significant victories, such as the great (and horrific) rid
e from Khwarezmia through Iran into Baghdad saw the Mongols fielding over 100,00

0 core cavalry wiping out smaller city garrisons which added up to a greater sum
. (400,000+ in the Wikipedia entry.)
On the other hand, Kublai Khan faced the most difficulty when he tried to rely o
n the brute force of raw numbers in trying to invade Japan and Vietnam.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr [score hidden] 53 minutes ago
Typhoons MVP.
Japan during that period could have used a Mongol Invasion though. Would have be
en cool.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 27 points 3 hours ago
If you like this stuff, I recommend Netflix's Marco Polo
permalink
[ ]Sys_init 30 points 3 hours ago
marco polo is also nice if you like lies and you are not a fan of actual history
:)
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 15 points 2 hours ago
It is also nice if you like kung fu. So far it has some pretty good kung fu chor
eography (and some naked kung fu as a bonus).
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 1 point 2 hours ago
Yeah they were very nicely choreographed
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]glhavebacon 26 points 2 hours ago
Lol that is correct. Still entertaining. Also lots of boobs.
permalinkparent
[ ]torof 19 points 2 hours ago
Asian boobs
permalinkparent
[ ]cock_boy 16 points 2 hours ago
Came for the kung fu, stayed for the Asian boobs.
But really though, I'm really enjoying Marco Polo. Almost finished with season 1
. I'm excited for Season 2.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kekoa_ok 2 points 1 hour ago
Boobs
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]mcflory98 2 points 2 hours ago
Problem?
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Sys_init 2 points 2 hours ago
Yeah i liked it
permalinkparent
[ ]oskomena 1 point 1 hour ago
They're trying to become HBO, so...
permalinkparent
[ ]TheTruthLiar 10 points 2 hours ago
Because liking history and liking the tv show can't coexist.
permalinkparent
[ ]Sys_init 6 points 2 hours ago
I liked the show myself haha. It was just a reminder to look at it critically
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 4 points 1 hour ago
I just finished it yesterday and I gotta say as much as I love the show it reall
y shouldn't have been called Marco Polo, it has nothing to do with him and it do

esn't even really feel like he's the main character most of the time.
It did make me realise how badly I wanted a show about the mongols.
It's sort of like if they'd called Seinfeld "Kramer", sure he's in all (almost a
ll for Kramer at least) episodes yet he's not the main character at all.
I'm also pretty sure Marco Polo didn't turn into a super kung-fu assassin that f
ought for the Khans in real life but who knows..
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 3 points 1 hour ago
I've heard an unofficial consensus that the show should just be called Mongols.
I think maybe Khan or Kublai Khan could work too.
permalinkparent
[ ]D8-42 1 point 1 hour ago
I'd be okay with a whole show just about the Khans, but yeah pretty much anythin
g other than Marco Polo would've worked.
permalinkparent
[ ]from_dust 2 points 1 hour ago
While its definitely entertainment and not documentary, theres a lot they got ri
ght with that show. i think you could do far worse, considering the source mater
ial is a 2nd hand retelling of one mans version of a society. It was the first w
ritten account by a westerner, its definitely going to have some... shades- of t
ruth in it.
permalinkparent
[ ]makerofshoes 1 point 1 hour ago
Given how Hollywood takes huge liberties with pretty much everything, I was kind
of surprised the other day when I looked up Marco Polo on Wikipedia and found t
hat a bunch of the stuff was true. E.g., his dad and uncle were named Niccolo an
d Maffeo, they were traders who met him for the first time in his late teens, th
ey met Kublai Khan and were charged with returning priests and holy stuff to him
...I kind of figured most of that was made up.
I know there is a lot of fiction in the story but apparently some of the stuff a
ctually is true, which is cool. The best result is when seeing a show inspires p
eople to actually go out and read the real story that they wouldn't have otherwi
se.
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]veritate_valeo 2 points 1 hour ago
It's like Asian Game of Thrones.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]jshanthonymayne 5 points 1 hour ago
I've just got done binge watching Marco Polo, which I found very interesting. So
this thread is like a candy store to me...
permalink
[ ]Fyodor007 2 points 1 hour ago
I did the same thing, I really enjoyed the show. Very well done.
permalinkparent
[ ]jshanthonymayne [score hidden] 44 minutes ago
Hell yeah. I wonder what season 2 could be about, if there will even be one...
permalinkparent
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]akambe 5 points 1 hour ago
Almost finished listening to Dan Carlin's excellent 5-part podcast on the Mongul
s: http://www.dancarlin.com/product-tag/mongols/
Highly recommended.
permalink
[ ]Aquilam 11 points 2 hours ago
They were an unmatched force, man for man....for a time.
Once the word got out about the Mongols and their tactics, armies were raised an
d trained specifically to beat them, often using their own tactics.
The mamlukes for example were trained from young boys (slave soldiers, often pur

chased from the very same steppes as the Mongols, or peoples under pressure from
them), to be the warrior caste. Unlike the Mongols who had custom/personally ma
de bows and armor, the mamlukes had bows and armor made by a skilled craftsman.
Think of what it would be like to play tennis against someone with a store-bough
t racket vs. one that you made yourself..
And unlike the free Mongols, the mamlukes were slaves, and training was a lifelo
ng pursuit; drilling was a part of life.
Of course the simultaneous success of the mamlukes against the Mongols and outre
amers came after the death of ghengis and his first wave of hardened veterans an
d seasoned commanders, so we'll never know who had the best soldiers for their t
ime; but since the mamlukes were defeated by soldiers of even higher caliber (th
e Janissary corps of the ottomans), I would say professional soldier>conscript e
very time.
permalink
[ ]juicius 6 points 2 hours ago
The Mongol tactics weren't anything new. Parthia used the same to great effect i
n in the Battle of Carrhae against Rome over a thousand years ago. One truly dis
tinguishing thing the Mongols had against virtually any foes they faced during t
heir rule was that they had iron discipline. So a well-organized and well-led tr
oops had the best chance against them regardless of the tactics used. For exampl
e, the Mongols smashed khitan, kipchak, and other steppe nomads who used virtual
ly identical tactics and armaments.
permalinkparent
[ ]PoliteDebater 2 points 1 hour ago
Mamluks basically were a steppe people too. They were mainly Kipchak and other t
urkic tribes. The Mamluks only really fought against Hulagu who is the grandson
of Ghengis Khan. I would argue that GK was a brilliant tactician and that's what
really gave him an edge. Not to mention the Mamluks could also refer to the peo
ple of Khwarazmian dynasty who GK did absolutely crush.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 6 points 2 hours ago
mamlukes
Wow. An entire army of Great Danes?
permalinkparent
[ ]ManofManyTalentz 1 point 1 hour ago
No that's Marmaduke. You're thinking of the spread made with fruits.
permalinkparent
[ ]prodigy3006 2 points 2 hours ago
This post has some terrible allusions, most specifically the tennis racket one.
permalinkparent
[ ]DavidlikesPeace 1 point 1 hour ago*
Technology also changed. The Mongols were so successful because they merged the
traditional fast blitzkrieg of the steppe with the siege equipment stolen from c
onquered China. However, new developments in plate armor and gunpowder eventuall
y displaced the light horse archer with heavy cavalry shock troops and infantry
formations. The janissaries man to man would have been run over by a cavalry cha
rge. The Mongol archer might have been smashed apart by plate armored enemies. S
ophisticated gunpowder tactics however, including improvised field defense outwo
rks and effective, accurate musket fire (and the Ottomans had better accuracy th
an European armies for a long time) gave infantry supremacy over traditional cav
alry in 1500s Eurasia.
permalinkparent
[ ]Actionbuilding 6 points 3 hours ago
Also, Genghis Khan was John Wayne. John Wayne was unstoppable.
http://youtu.be/EHt0Pb8rkXU
permalink
[ ]micheru12 10 points 2 hours ago
This movie gave me cancer.
permalinkparent
[ ]WildVariety1[??] 4 points 2 hours ago

Lots of other people, too.


permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 3 points 3 hours ago
Mother fucking Tsobodai!
permalink
[ ]GeeJo 6 points 2 hours ago
Haven't seen that particular romanisation of Subutai/Subodai's name before.
permalinkparent
[ ]break2n 1 point 2 hours ago
I've seen so many I don't even know anymore
permalinkparent
[ ]hawkin5 1 point 1 hour ago
It's how Conn Iggulden spells it in his novels.
permalinkparent
[ ]Infosloth 1 point 1 hour ago
Yeah, i'm not sure how it's spelled but it doesn't god damn matter. This guy, th
is fucking guy.....
Everytime I think, surely this is the end for him, he slaughters 50 thousand eur
opeans and rides away laughing.
permalinkparent
[ ]KIRBCZECH 2 points 3 hours ago
decoys Louis.... DECOYS!!!!
permalink
[ ]ZKXX 3 points 2 hours ago
The Mongols: Known rusemen.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Autorotator 3 points 1 hour ago
You guys really need to read the Conqueror series by Conn Iggulden (sp?). It sen
t me down a months long rabbit hole of reading non-fiction History on the subjec
t. Then I read his Emperor series. Same effect.
You can TIL for years on these guys. The dynasty, the family, the friends, enemi
es, duels, brutality... all a product of an insanely rough environment.
I will, some day, do a weeks long tour of the great Steppe of Asia.
Seriously, read that book series.
permalink
[ ]Digimonami 7 points 3 hours ago
Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons.
permalink
[ ]bawbawbaw1 6 points 3 hours ago
It worked for Mel Gibson in The Patriot.
permalinkparent
[ ]AirborneRodent138 7 points 2 hours ago
And in that battle in real life, too. That movie got so many things wrong, but t
he Battle of Cowpens wasn't one of them. The Americans really did use a sham ret
reat by militia to draw the British into a killing zone.
permalinkparent
[ ]DrDragun 6 points 2 hours ago
Did the American commander enter single combat with the British commander while
dual wielding a tomahawk and American flag?
permalinkparent
[ ]infamous-spaceman 3 points 1 hour ago
He actually had two american flags and rode atop a massive eagle.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]yeaheyeah 2 points 1 hour ago
He better have, it's just the American thing to do.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]bawbawbaw1 2 points 2 hours ago

TIL.
I was talking about the bit where Mel Gibson walks right into the British comman
ders HQ, shows him a bunch of wooden stakes clothed in red coats and then gets a
ll his men freed, before he gets trolled by the other British soldier who killed
his kids.
But still, TIL.
permalinkparent
[ ]hkdharmon 1 point 2 hours ago
And Batman.
permalinkparent
[ ]Cessno 2 points 2 hours ago
Only to the uninitiated
permalinkparent
[ ]Apology_Panda 2 points 1 hour ago
But we are initiated, aren't we Bruce?
permalinkparent
[ ]_ebola_ 5 points 2 hours ago
... or lighting several camp fires for every man so that by night they looked li
ke a much larger horde than they really were.
permalink
[ ]twinsizebed[??] 2 points 1 hour ago
You are correct Marco.
permalinkparent
[ ]Kachiun_ 5 points 2 hours ago
Another one of their many tactics was to feign panic. The mongols would be runni
ng in all directions, howling and screaming in fear during battle. Their enemies
would charge at them in a disorganised manner, leaving their ranks for easy pic
kings of flustered Mongol meat. One snap of an order from a General made the mon
gols form up instantaneously, all knowing their exact position. This would engul
f the enemies, who had stepped out of formation. This tactic caught the enemies
by surprise. They just would not expect a few thousand Mongols on horses panicki
ng in disarray suddenly form up, surrounding them and firing arrow upon arrow in
to their armour.
permalink
[ ]follier 5 points 2 hours ago
It's Mongol Month here on Reddit. Get your horse and short recurve bow and come
stay awhile.
permalink
[ ]dafones 2 points 2 hours ago
I wonder what Crash Course thinks of Marco Polo.
permalink
[ ]msthe_student 3 points 2 hours ago
Yeah! paging /u/thesoundandthefury
permalinkparent
[ ]TheAngryPlatypus 1 point 1 hour ago
I'm about halfway through the series. I'm pretty damn sure a list of what the se
ries got right will be way shorter than what they got wrong, but I'm still inter
ested.
permalinkparent
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Atopadot 2 points 2 hours ago
Medieval II lied to me
permalink
[ ]_ebola_ 2 points 2 hours ago
They were also 100% cavalry, and had a meaty, dairy-y diet. Many of their foes w
ere grain-fed foot soldiers.
They were stronger and better equipped.
permalink
[ ]Nukethepandas 2 points 1 hour ago
Certified free range organic mongols.

permalinkparent
[ ]DavidR747 3 points 2 hours ago
yeh... Keshiks are OP :P
permalink
[ ]trumpet4lyf3 2 points 2 hours ago
Goddamn civ V
permalinkparent
[ ]Ramy_ 2 points 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin's podcast on this is incredible
permalink
[ ]NevrEndr 1 point 2 hours ago
Dan Carlin did an awesome podcast series on the history of the Mongols. Check ou
t Hardcore History - Wrath of the Mongols.
www.dancarlin.com
permalink
[ ]Notexactlyserious 2 points 2 hours ago
If anyone is interested in learning more about then Mongols and Ghengis Khan , c
heck out Dan Carlins podcast series "Hardcore History." His 5 part, nearly 12 ho
ur special called "Wrath of the Khans" is amazing.
permalink
[ ]adarvesh0 2 points 2 hours ago
It was all an elaborate ruse!
permalink
[ ]TheVegetaMonologues 2 points 2 hours ago
Were you in the Dothraki v. Rohirrim thread over at /r/whowouldwin, by any chanc
e?
permalink
[ ]lucutzu33 2 points 2 hours ago
Here is a very good podcast about this: http://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcor
e-history-43-wrath-of-the-khans-i/
permalink
[ ]_DooM_ 2 points 2 hours ago
This is part one about the Mongols, Dan Carlin puts it very eloquently and makes
the listen quite exciting. He has a heap of other good content too:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h_tCcJmn7HA&spfreload=10
permalink
[ ]honeybakedpipi 2 points 1 hour ago
Netflix: Marco polo
permalink
[ ]Account_For_Thought 2 points 1 hour ago
Everyone stop typing and go listen to Dan Carlin's 5 part podcast called Wrath o
f the Khans.
permalink
[ ]MidtownWest 2 points 1 hour ago
Is the movie Mogol any good?
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]turbo [score hidden] 57 minutes ago
Sticks on horses to create dust storms
that's perhaps what's happening in the fi
rst episode of Marco Polo?
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]Themantogoto [score hidden] 50 minutes ago
Sure they were outnumbered but their ENTIRE army was on horseback. No one could
counter that easily without an equal number of cavalry, which no one had. Horse
archers were the equivalent of armored vehicles today, quick hard hitting ranged
combatants that could skirmish in and out of the zone of fire. Used correctly y
ou could destroy a foot army with very little casualties.
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)

[ ]lpt3219 [score hidden] 44 minutes ago


Two things the Mongols did I found highly interesting were: 1) When their army s
tarted being effected by the Plague, they would take their dead (only if the Pla
gue killed them), load them into catapults and launch them into the enemy's city
/fortress. Thus the cities population would become infected. 2) When confronted
with a Moat in a city they were sieging, they gathered up all the prisoners they
had, and anyone they could find, and simply Kill them and throw their bodies in
the moat to serve as a bridge.
permalink
[ ]mutefan[??] [score hidden] 43 minutes ago
Mongolian here! It's nice to see something related to my country and it's histor
y in reddit at front page :)
I think that my ancestors were barbaric and brutal but so far there's no denying
Genghis Khan conquered his way from small family of few man to uniting all the
tribes ( I guess that's how it would be called in english?) and making the Mongo
l Empire and making a way up to conquer Asia itself to think that they were much
fewer than any of their man enemies is actually beyond amazing, to think that t
hey were the driving force and applying pressure to make China build the Great W
all.
Lot of things not mentioned here but it is amazing, love you guys.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]theluckyshrimp [score hidden] 39 minutes ago
They would also have wide receivers declare as ineligible just before the snap.
permalink
[ ]Sankohuy [score hidden] 35 minutes ago
I don't understand how this works though. Wouldn't making other think they have
more than them caused the enemy to send more men, in return, causing the Mongals
to be more out numbered? Extra stick dummies on horses can't fight for you
permalink
load more comments (2 replies)
[ ]Ericbishi [score hidden] 18 minutes ago
Dear OP If you are interested in Mongol history I recommending checking out http
://www.dancarlin.com/hardcore-history-series/
The title of the pod cast is "Wrath of the Khans". It's great.
permalink
[ ]Pearberr 2 points 1 hour ago
The Mongols were actually brilliant, and Ghengis Khan needs to be remembered for
that, not his "barbarianism."
He used diplomacy to get nations to go to war, then he'd run them both over. LIK
E A KHAN!
He used SO SMART tactics like these listed to make his armies seem small, earnin
g many victories for free. LIKE A KHAN!
He ALWAYS killed the aristocracy and the governments of cities he conquered, but
he also ALWAYS kept talented people and added them to his courts. LIKE A KHAN!
He absorbed the technology of these nations and used it to help him conquer new
territories. LIKE A KHAN!
Oh ya, he continued to use diplomacy to weaken enemies before he showed up. Cuzz
SO SMART to make them fight AND the people are weary of fighting when you show
up and are more of pushovers. LIKE A KHAN!
Biological Warfare. Dude would use plague heads and toss them into cities during
sieges than just party. LIKE A KHAN!
Started an economic boom across all the world as free trade flourished. Arguably
set the stage for the Renaissance in Europe and the fall of the Islamic State i
n the Middle East. LIKE A KHAN!
He's probably your great-something-grandfather. LIKE A KHAN!
Got his dick chopped off by a prostitute and diedcitation needed. LIKE A KHAN!
permalink
[ ]skztr 1 point 2 hours ago
Truly an exceptional people

permalink
[ ]apologies-in-advance 1 point 2 hours ago
Those were some confused horses I bet.
permalink
[ ]just4thelolz 1 point 2 hours ago
Well, horses were kinda their gimmick. Can't blame them for milking it for all i
t's worth.
permalink
[ ]TheOnlyArtifex 2 points 2 hours ago
Elaborate ruses
Tying sticks to the horses' tails
permalink
[ ]sieb 2 points 2 hours ago
Wait for it! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PqcVro-3f4I
(full history) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=szxPar0BcMo
permalink
[ ]KingJoffreyTheBaked 1 point 2 hours ago
Let me guess. You saw that post about jabe or whatever the name of the archer th
at shot gengis is and started researching ?
permalink
[ ]ranak3 1 point 2 hours ago
When you have the smaller formations, you learn guile - Crocker
permalink
[ ]JocularPhilosopher 1 point 2 hours ago
If you didn't get this from Dan Carlin's Hardcore History about the Khans, go li
sten to it!
permalink
[ ]benska 1 point 2 hours ago
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2L4T7510gbw
permalink
[ ]Natdaprat 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: Go check out Hardcore History podcast from Dan Carling!
permalink
[ ]yummyluckycharms 0 points 2 hours ago
Read Jack weatherford books on the mongols - he's probably the best historian ri
ght now who actually writes about them.
Also - mongolian empire wasnt destroyed by a man - but by the flea. It was the b
lack death that broke their trade network up, and just like the first dark age o
f 1200 bc, it caused a major realignment of empires at the time.
permalink
[ ]djdadi 1 point 2 hours ago
Why are none of these kind of tactics used today?
permalink
[ ]Infosloth 0 points 1 hour ago
These tactics are used today. Modern warfare, well especially the sort of tactic
s you'd see in the world wars were very reminiscent of mongol maneuvering.
permalinkparent
[ ]LuckyNickels 1 point 2 hours ago
There's a great books called The Mongol Art of War by Timothy May that I read as
an undergraduate. It gave me a deep appreciation for how sophisticated Mongol s
ociety really was. It did tend to downplay how horrific Genghis Khan's tactics w
ere, but it nevertheless did a good job of dispelling the "filthy Eastern hordes
" narrative that so many people seem to believe.
permalink
[ ]elmarko44 1 point 2 hours ago
They are, after all, the exception.
permalink
[ ]karmanaut9 1 point 2 hours ago
Mongol expert here. Ive I've watched the first three episodes of Marco Polo . if
anyone needs any info

permalink
[ ]poorking 1 point 2 hours ago
But mostly, they were facing unmounted armies. Gunpowder and cannon did them in.
permalink
[ ]homesweetmobilehome 1 point 2 hours ago
They also did some pretty tricky things with sweet and sour pork.
permalink
[ ]JillyPolla 1 point 2 hours ago
The reason why people described them as hordes (even though they were outnumbere
d most of the time) was due to their mobility. Their opponents simply thought th
at the Mongols has to have a large number to have accomplished their military ma
neuvers and to show up where they were in battles.
If you look at old battle maps, most of the time it was simple, two main lines o
f battle, simple movements, etc. Mongols however maneuvered like a modern mobili
zed army would.
permalink
[ ]blackhawkrock 1 point 2 hours ago
All I got out of this was it seems the Mongols had more horses then men.
permalink
[ ]answer-my-question 1 point 2 hours ago
I'm gonna put this out there so the series gains more views. Everyone, watch Mar
co Polo made by Netflix. Its set in 2 generation after Ghingis and is about Kubl
ai Khan.
permalink
[ ]TheDruth 1 point 2 hours ago
Anybody who likes the topic of Mongols or history in general will do themselves
a favor by listening to Dan Carlin's Hardcore History on this topic.
It's a multi-part, multi-hour long podcast, but he does the best job of telling
the STORY of history while giving clean facts.
permalink
[ ]Ikinhaszkarmakplx2 1 point 2 hours ago
It pays to listen to Sun Tzu.
permalink
[ ]Notmiefault 1 point 2 hours ago
It's probably worth mentioning that while the Mongols were often outnumbered, th
eir forces were 100% cavalry. A single cavalryman is worth quite a few infantrym
an, especially if that cavalryman also happens to be an expert bowman (which mos
t of them were).
permalink
[ ]desayunosaur 1 point 2 hours ago
ITT: South Park, I heart Dan Carlin, Crash Course. And some useful comments.
permalink
[ ]schmostin 1 point 2 hours ago
Suuuure they did.
permalink
[ ]my_mojo_dojo 1 point 1 hour ago
few methods he used:
he would have his men steal herds of animals or kidnap locals from town, then he
would watch the reaction. if the town people got together to find the animals o
r kidnapped people, he and his troops would avoid that town. if the town people
didn't care, he would plunder it.
he would send his people into a town, and before his arrival, his men would spre
ad rumors of his military ruthlessness. by the time he would get there, towns wi
ll just surrender.
permalink
[ ]FockSmulder 1 point 1 hour ago
OP, what is it about the word 'elaborate' that you don't understand?
permalink
[ ]kabamman 1 point 1 hour ago
They also lit 5 fires per man.

permalink
[ ]Thingofstarstuff 1 point 1 hour ago
They also did allot guerilla tactics. Hit and run etc.
permalink
[ ]Luftwaffle88 1 point 1 hour ago
Things I learned from Dan Carlin's hardcore history podcast about the mongols.
Their favorite tactic was the feigned flight, where they would attack the enemy
troops for a bit and then retreat after taking a few casualties. The other caval
ry always charged thinking they could finish them off, but this is when the mong
ols who were expert trick riders, would turn around on their horses and shoot th
eir pursuers full of arrows.
Mongols would shoot when all 4 of their horses feet were in the air and could sh
oot down a dozen birds in flight while at a full gallop. Average mongol had abou
t 3-6 horses during a campaign.
basically the mongols were very metal.
permalink
[ ]preskot 1 point 1 hour ago
The Mongols literally did whatever they wanted. There were no mods whatsoever on
that server.
permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
they were zergs
permalink
[ ]mountaingoat_tom 1 point 1 hour ago
Damn you mongolians, you break down my shitty wall
permalink
[ ]bati555 1 point 1 hour ago
Another thing about their horses: Mongols, still to this day when desperation ca
lls for it, poke a small hole in their horse's artery and drink the blood. The h
orse isn't harmed and the Mongol lives for another day.
permalink
[ ]Slam_Hardshaft 1 point 1 hour ago
This thread makes me miss the history channel.
permalink
[ ]timewaitsforsome 1 point 1 hour ago
this thread makes me miss the history channel
permalink
[ ]stinkfist37 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols, so hot right now
permalink
[ ]SummonKnight 1 point 1 hour ago
There's a Mongolian BBQ next to where I live and instead of "All you can eat" It
says "All you can conquer"
permalink
[ ]Meme616 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols Week on TIL
permalink
[ ]beerbobhelm 1 point 1 hour ago
They wrote the book on total war. True Sun Tzu was Chinese but he was influenced
by the tactics of the region. Please read "The Art of War". Takes about an hour
and will open your eyes.
permalink
[ ]Waldy565 1 point 1 hour ago
Gotta love human inguenity, even when it does involve barbaric nomads
permalink
[ ]iamamacro 1 point 1 hour ago
If Brad Pitt is reading this, there's going to be a movie...
permalink
[ ]moby323 1 point 1 hour ago
Doesn't a galloping horse create way more dust than the stick it is dragging?

permalink
[ ]RudegarWithFunnyHat 1 point 1 hour ago
well likely they often fought armies of untrained peasants when they were outnum
bered
permalink
[ ]Gaybro1992 1 point 1 hour ago
I bet it has something to do with that extra chromosome
permalink
[ ]moose6434 1 point 1 hour ago
One of the many reasons they were very much 'not to be fucked with'.
permalink
[ ]tezacatilpoca 1 point 1 hour ago
We are the exception.
permalink
[ ]zigius 1 point 1 hour ago
One of their most famous ruses was covering the enemy with sweet and sour pork
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]16_oz_mouse 1 point 1 hour ago
So, we're all just going to post what we learn via podcasts now? Every day Mongo
ls.
permalink
[ ]artoka 1 point 1 hour ago
They also dressed up their wifes and children as souldiers so when they surround
ed the city. The city people were estimating a way bigger mongol army than there
actually was. Another tactic was to give each souldier 2 tourches. So at night
the enemy would estimat double amount.
permalink
[ ]veritate_valeo 1 point 1 hour ago
Not to mention the time that they faced down the united armies of several Europe
an kingdoms. The Europeans thought, "hey, a great way to defend against an all-c
avalry army is to create a wall of wagons". And the mongols thought, "Hey, all t
he Europeans are crowded in one little spot, let's bring out our fucking gunpowd
er and cannons and rockets and shit. In the fucking 1200s".
If you ever wanted to know what would have happened if the tables had turned and
Europe had been on the receiving end of a technologically advanced conquering c
ivilization, you just have to look at the Mongol invasions.
permalink
load more comments (1 reply)
[ ]zz1991 1 point 1 hour ago
I remembered there was a castle that he could not break into, so he catapulted c
orpses died from plague into the cities, let the diseases spread and killed ever
yone inside, and just walked in
permalink
[ ]LanceGoodthrust 1 point 1 hour ago
Mongols: Always the exception.
permalink
[ ]elypieto[??] 1 point 1 hour ago
Has someone been watching Marco Polo on Netflix?!
permalink
[ ]ndc3 1 point 1 hour ago
This reminds me of the Chinese General who tricked his enemy by either drinking
at the gate or playing an instrument. I don't remember
permalink
[ ]GutieAa 1 point 1 hour ago
Check out the show Marco polo.its based on an adventurer in the khans kingdom. R
eminds me of game of thrones
permalink
[ ]badgerX3mushroom 1 point 1 hour ago*
I learned from watching Genghis Khan on Netflix that they would like more fires

in camps so it looked like they had more people


permalink
[ ]TheBigTimer 1 point 1 hour ago
Reminds me of Blazing Saddles in more ways than one. Fake Rockridge and Mongo.
permalink
[ ]JOPaulson 1 point 1 hour ago
It's almost obvious when you think about the logistics and other issues surround
ing an army made up entirely of cavalry.
permalink
[ ]farmerfound 1 point 1 hour ago
Honestly, not the best show I've ever watched, but "Marco Polo" was half way dec
ent and more about the reign of Kublai Khan thank Polo.
Honestly, it should have been titled "Khan", but I think America wouldn't have t
uned in for that if they knew the show as like 80% Asian.
permalink
[ ]Lhun 1 point 1 hour ago
http://netflix.com/marcopolo
permalink
[ ]Uzumukutaki 1 point 1 hour ago
Usopp was a mongol then.
permalink
[ ]C477um04 1 point 1 hour ago
and tying sticks to the horses' tails to create dust storms.
That is some smart thinking. I would not have come up with that.
permalink
load more comments (98 replies)
about
blog
about
team
source code
advertise
jobs
help
wiki
FAQ
reddiquette
rules
contact us
tools
mobile
firefox extension
chrome extension
buttons
widget
<3
reddit gold
store
redditgifts
reddit AMA app
reddit.tv
radio reddit
Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our User Agreement and Privacy Policy
. 2015 reddit inc. All rights reserved.
REDDIT and the ALIEN Logo are registered trademarks of reddit inc.
p

Potrebbero piacerti anche