The Mongolian Method

Hi everyone I thought that instead of going to the libary or a book store to get a book on the mongolians I just go here instead.

So just asking what was the mongolian method to conqoring and what was their military administration like? And what was their strategy like?
 
Basicly if you screwed with them then their would be no mercy.
Well in the thread sassanid's vs. Mongol's someone said their that the Mongolians had the most organized military of the world. Was it true and how did they passify so many large area's of land? And what was their method of how to do military campaigns?
 
Lets see well from what I remember if correctly the Mongol System was based on the Yassa which was essentially a Meritocracy like system that set up society and warfare.

Ghenghis Khan arranged his army into Tumans or 10,000 strong units. He made sure that the Mongol Warriors were ready for war especially with requirements for remount horses and so on. I thinkpart of their trainning and effectivness involved their lifestyle, they practically lived for the hunt and warring, with things such as horse riding and archery (which they used to dominate all) was essential to life on the Steppe. Plus with this more are able to go into action as theya re not constrained by sedetary living.

As the Mongols marched westward they would absorb numerous Steppe tribes into their Empire, very culturally diverse, the empire was pretty muchrun by the peoplethey conquered.

Further the Mongols were so successful because of their own logistic system, the complx nature of it allowed them to respond to attacks thousands of miles away in quick time and condct their complicated hit-and-run, feign attack, and manuvers they are sofamously known for. During Ghengis Period, he put absolute trust in his generals such as Subutai, and they in turn put their loyalty to him and it would be essentially them who would conquer the greatest extent of the empire.
 
Last edited:
Lets see well from what I remember if correctly the Mongol System was based on the Yassa which was essentially a Meritocracy like system that set up society and warfare.

Ghenghis Khan arranged his army into Tumans or 10,000 strong units. He made sure that the Mongol Warriors were ready for war especially with requirements for remount horses and so on. I thinkpart of their trainning and effectivness involved their lifestyle, they practically lived for the hunt and warring, with things such as horse riding and archery (which they used to dominate all) was essential to life on the Steppe. Plus with this more are able to go into action as theya re not constrained by sedetary living.

As the Mongols marched westward they would absorb numerous Steppe tribes into their Empire, very culturally diverse, the empire was pretty muchrun by the peoplethey conquered.

Further the Mongols were so successful because of their own logistic system, the complx nature of it allowed them to respond to attacks thousands of miles away in quick time and condct their complicated hit-and-run, feign attack, and manuvers they are sofamously known for. During Ghengis Period, he put absolute trust in his generals such as Subutai, and they in turn put their loyalty to him and it would be essentially them who would conquer the greatest extent of the empire.


wow thank you. What was their logistic system made of?
 
Lets see well from what I remember if correctly the Mongol System was based on the Yassa which was essentially a Meritocracy like system that set up society and warfare.

Ghenghis Khan arranged his army into Tumans or 10,000 strong units. He made sure that the Mongol Warriors were ready for war especially with requirements for remount horses and so on. I thinkpart of their trainning and effectivness involved their lifestyle, they practically lived for the hunt and warring, with things such as horse riding and archery (which they used to dominate all) was essential to life on the Steppe. Plus with this more are able to go into action as theya re not constrained by sedetary living.
Earlier Central Asian nomadic tribes did the same and with the exception of South China, conquered every area that the Mongols did.

As the Mongols marched westward they would absorb numerous Steppe tribes into their Empire, very culturally diverse, the empire was pretty muchrun by the peoplethey conquered.
Nothing new here. The Persian, Romans, Assyrians and Huns did the same.

Further the Mongols were so successful because of their own logistic system, the complx nature of it allowed them to respond to attacks thousands of miles away in quick time and condct their complicated hit-and-run, feign attack, and manuvers they are sofamously known for.
There is nothing sophisticated about moving a herd of horses from one patch of grass to another and without the horses the Mongols would have been nothing. The Huns had exactly the same same system and so Atilla had to keep dropping back to the steppe for grazing. If you are looking for a sophisticated logistic system look at the Romans. Virtually every one else lived off the land and kept their armies on the move so they would not starve.

Because of this a Mongol army was not able to operate beyond a hit and run incursion in close terrain country such as Europe or South China (the latter they took using a Chinese army).

During Ghengis Period, he put absolute trust in his generals such as Subutai, and they in turn put their loyalty to him and it would be essentially them who would conquer the greatest extent of the empire.
This is a key point and something that I have not seen raised about the scruffy sheep herders before. Without such trust and loyalty and poor communications you can't run a successful continental scale war. In that respect the situation was very unusual. In contrast look at the Macedonians, later Romans or the Spanish in America to see how things were "normally" run. Even then the Mongols were not able to keep the show on the road for more than a generation.
 
Earlier Central Asian nomadic tribes did the same and with the exception of South China, conquered every area that the Mongols did.

Not all in the same Empire they didn't. Sure the Seljuks moved through Persia to much of the Middle East but not into China. The Jin conquered northern China but not to Persia. The Gokturks conquered most of Central Asian Steppe but neer broke into Persia or China. The Mongols on the otherhand conquered all of China-Korea, Central Asia, Persia, Middle East and large portions of the Caucasus and Anatolia up to Poland in the Balkans.

Nothing new here. The Persian, Romans, Assyrians and Huns did the same.

Nothing new indeed but they actually did it, compared to the other Khanates and Empires of theirregio and background who didn't.

There is nothing sophisticated about moving a herd of horses from one patch of grass to another and without the horses the Mongols would have been nothing. The Huns had exactly the same same system and so Atilla had to keep dropping back to the steppe for grazing. If you are looking for a sophisticated logistic system look at the Romans. Virtually every one else lived off the land and kept their armies on the move so they would not starve.

Compared to the current armies of their time period could the same be said? The Mongol Warriors were self-efficent and look what they went and did, this plays into the tactics of the Mongols. Their raids and hit and run attacks, outflanking the enemy and totaly out manuver them over a span of hundreds and hundreds of miles (look at Ghengis' invasion of Khwarezmid).

Because of this a Mongol army was not able to operate beyond a hit and run incursion in close terrain country such as Europe or South China (the latter they took using a Chinese army).

Such as incorporating Non-Mongols into the Mongol Empire and making use of them to further increase the greatness and effectiveness? Ghenghis knew the Mongols were just Nomads who had no skill, so he did the smart thing and outsourced. If the Mongols could have brought in greater numbers the Chinese to the west or any of their local populations then they could have been more effective. Unfortunatly such a thing was not yet devised due to complications with the largely sedetary populations and technological innovations were not up to play yet not to mention in following years the intergration system would be reversed by successors.

This is a key point and something that I have not seen raised about the scruffy sheep herders before. Without such trust and loyalty and poor communications you can't run a successful continental scale war. In that respect the situation was very unusual. In contrast look at the Macedonians, later Romans or the Spanish in America to see how things were "normally" run. Even then the Mongols were not able to keep the show on the road for more than a generation.

Well the Mongols were certainly not perfect and while Ghenghis did try to push for a Meritocracy with the Yassa it just didnt take hold when dealing with his sons. Perhaps the failure is just because Ghenghis did it too much with women. Though looking at the Mongol Successor States and then the Post-Mongol Successor States such as the Qing and the Crimean the legacy of Temujin lasted a long while.
 
There is nothing sophisticated about moving a herd of horses from one patch of grass to another and without the horses the Mongols would have been nothing. The Huns had exactly the same same system and so Atilla had to keep dropping back to the steppe for grazing. If you are looking for a sophisticated logistic system look at the Romans. Virtually every one else lived off the land and kept their armies on the move so they would not starve.

This is something of a myth. Steppe nomads did not just wander from one point to another aimlessly, hoping they will find fertile ground in new locations. They moved from summer to winter locations with full knowledge of what awaits them at each one, doing it regulary and moving between few points within known territory, relatively short distance away (~100km). When they did move larger distances (say Huns moving west in 4th/5th century) they did so after proper reconaissance or when forced to do it fleeing in direction where they knew what awaits them.

They couldn't just gather their herds and people and go west, hoping they will find fertile lands that will support them and that locals will be either nonexistant or weak enough to be overcome. Nomadic lifestyle is marginal as it is, moving large numbers in random direction without knowing what or who lies there is just asking for disaster.
 
They couldn't just gather their herds and people and go west, hoping they will find fertile lands that will support them and that locals will be either nonexistant or weak enough to be overcome. Nomadic lifestyle is marginal as it is, moving large numbers in random direction without knowing what or who lies there is just asking for disaster.

Exactly! The Mongols used Recon.
 
This is something of a myth. Steppe nomads did not just wander from one point to another aimlessly, hoping they will find fertile ground in new locations.
I believe that you are putting words in my mouth. All I said was that they moved from one patch of grass to another. I never said anything about how they did it. My point on the Mongol's system of supply still stands because their military prowess depended on fodder which they did not transport or stockpile. They had to keep on the move.

On a more general point, the Mongols under Ghengis Khan did not do any particular thing that no one else had done before. What he did was get the whole package working more successfully than previous Central Asian nomads. Take away Ghengis and you get reversion back to a number of Central Asian states.

It should also be noted that when any of the Mongol's enemies got their act in gear as the Mameluks of Egypt did, the Mongols could be out Mongoled as happened in the Battle of Ain Jalut. One of the Mameluks advantages here was that they were a more professional force than the tribal scruffy sheep herders they defeated. The reason for this was that their society was wealthier and afford a better army than a tribal levy.
 
It should also be noted that when any of the Mongol's enemies got their act in gear as the Mameluks of Egypt did, the Mongols could be out Mongoled as happened in the Battle of Ain Jalut. One of the Mameluks advantages here was that they were a more professional force than the tribal scruffy sheep herders they defeated. The reason for this was that their society was wealthier and afford a better army than a tribal levy.

I don;t think so. Did Europa do better?

He tried to make a Multi-Ethnic Empire, on a basis on wheather you were Turkic, Mongol, or Chinese or whoever you could contribute and gain a position in the government. As said earlier this proved potent in use of the Chinese. He purposly broke up the various Steppe Tribes in a way to do away with the squabbles that broke up the other Empire, unfortunately his methods eventually became out of practice after a few Khans and so we got the disintergration of the Empire through extensive segregation (falling back on older practices).
 
Actually, the Mongols also helped by the fact that many of the rulers of the kingdoms surrounding them during that time are incompetent.

Genghis also willing to put his utmost trust in his generals's loyalty.

He also listens to whoever can give him good advices.

But his empire splits into 4 kingdoms after his death due to the succession problem with his oldest son.

It also doesn't help that unlike the Manchus in Qing dynasty, they treated the Han majority as 3rd and 4th class of citizens.

That's why the Han viewed the Mongols more as a foreign, colonial power instead of a successive, "legitimate" dynasty.

Things also got more screwed up when his descendants fought among themselves for power, until they got defeated by the Mings.
 
It should also be noted that when any of the Mongol's enemies got their act in gear as the Mameluks of Egypt did, the Mongols could be out Mongoled as happened in the Battle of Ain Jalut. One of the Mameluks advantages here was that they were a more professional force than the tribal scruffy sheep herders they defeated. The reason for this was that their society was wealthier and afford a better army than a tribal levy.

The Mamluks at that point are first-generation imports from the Steppe. They're the same scruffy shepherds in fancier gear, whose parents the Mongols defeated just years prior. That and Kitbugha got betrayed by the Crusaders, otherwise he'd have had clear retreat and probably never given battle. So it appears you don't actually have a point with Ain Jalut.
 
Top