Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Asian History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Asian History Asian History Forum - China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand, and the Asia-Pacific Region


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old October 2nd, 2013, 01:45 PM   #1
Historian
 
Joined: Jul 2013
From: USA
Posts: 2,515
Was Genghis Khan good military commander or just a good uniter?


Do you think Genghis Khan was a good military commander?

I keep on hearing how "Genghis Khan conquered more area than Alexander, Caesar, or Napoleon" but does that really make him the best?

His career on the field is never well recorded. Many of his battles and sieges and Persia were not even done by him but by his suboridnates.

Did he plan the Badger Mouth Campaign in China? His unifcation of the tribes of the North seem to been more politically oriantated than a military campaign and battles were not well recorded.

Subutai has a much more impressive career IMO. What do you think? Do you think Genghis is even among the greatest?
Mrbsct is offline  
Remove Ads
Old October 2nd, 2013, 01:47 PM   #2
.
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: Valles Marineris, Mars
Posts: 4,833

A good general needs good subordinates to fight. Plus, it takes skill to command a huge army.
Gorge123 is offline  
Old October 2nd, 2013, 01:54 PM   #3
.
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: Valles Marineris, Mars
Posts: 4,833

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrbsct View Post

Did he plan the Badger Mouth Campaign in China? His unifcation of the tribes of the North seem to been more politically oriantated than a military campaign and battles were not well recorded.

Subutai has a much more impressive career IMO. What do you think? Do you think Genghis is even among the greatest?
I am not sure what you mean. A good general needs good subordinates to fight. Genghis Khan was also a great organizer, and taking advantages of the resources that he had. As for Badger Mouth, it seems that he planned i and was the commander.
Gorge123 is offline  
Old October 5th, 2013, 02:52 AM   #4
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2012
Posts: 2,027

Is there any book or good website that talk about Mongol war tactic?
Zoopiter is offline  
Old October 5th, 2013, 03:53 AM   #5

tornada's Avatar
Wind Lord
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: India
Posts: 15,192
Blog Entries: 2

Genghis also whupped the Shah of Kharzeme. Not to mention the other Mongol tribes such as the Naiman when they had refused to ally with him. And the reason Genghis was better? He allowed Generals like Tsubutai and Jelme to reach their potential. Genghis built an empire. Alexander swanned through Persia, and his empire fell apart after his death faster than you could say Megas Alexandros.
tornada is offline  
Old October 7th, 2013, 06:29 AM   #6

kauchenvinci-0's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: May 2012
From: On a chain of Extinct Volcanoes
Posts: 1,628
Blog Entries: 6

Khan is definitely a better organizer and administrator than being a military general , but the fact that the former qualities are much more important than the latter one holds good for emperors/leaders .
Having said that , there is no way one could undermine his martial capabilities keeping in view his background of tribes and the paramountcy they attest to the physical prowess and the combative capabilities of their leaders of the tribe. And to bandwagon all the tribes of the Asian Steppes , it is no less than a colossal task of exhibiting his legitimacy , which had been done , through both military adeptness and psychological tactics [ by luring the most influential Shaman to his side ] .

Though famous for being obstinate and ruthless , he was not always a megalomaniac and unlike most of the famous generals , he knew the best of his men and meticulously used them , by which he was able to , not only consolidate , but , in the first time in history , administered a transcontinental empire with little glitches !

So I presume he is a very good [ may not be the best] military commander , but one of the best uniters/ leaders/organizers , you'd ever find !
kauchenvinci-0 is offline  
Old October 7th, 2013, 10:11 AM   #7
Historian
 
Joined: Jul 2013
From: USA
Posts: 2,515

Quote:
Originally Posted by tornada View Post
Genghis also whupped the Shah of Kharzeme. Not to mention the other Mongol tribes such as the Naiman when they had refused to ally with him. And the reason Genghis was better? He allowed Generals like Tsubutai and Jelme to reach their potential. Genghis built an empire. Alexander swanned through Persia, and his empire fell apart after his death faster than you could say Megas Alexandros.
Genghis built no empire lol. They assimilated to their conquered cultures turning into Turks, Persians, and Chinese rather than Mongol.

Genghis Khan's empire barely even lasted 60 years as a single entity.
Mrbsct is offline  
Old October 7th, 2013, 10:48 AM   #8

tornada's Avatar
Wind Lord
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: India
Posts: 15,192
Blog Entries: 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrbsct View Post
Genghis built no empire lol. They assimilated to their conquered cultures turning into Turks, Persians, and Chinese rather than Mongol.

Genghis Khan's empire barely even lasted 60 years as a single entity.
That's exactly the sort of euro-centrist BS that has used against Genghis' Empire. They absorbed local culture, so the empire fell apart? By that logic the Roman Empire never existed, seeing as they absorbed local cultures and religions. Alexander absorbed Persian Culture, so i suppose he never even conquered Persia. Genghis' Mongolians allowed local cultures to exist, that's a sign of their cultural superiority. The empire Genghis built survived as a single political unit for 88 years, and Mongol superiority for almost 150 years

Genghis empire was divided into administrative khanates, true. No ancient or medieval empire could become of that size and remain a single administrative unit. The empire remained under a single overall ruler from the time of Genghis to the death of Kublai Khan - that's 1206-1294 AD. Not 60 years, but 88 years. As a single unified unit. The fractured Khanates emerged as independent units post 1296 and the empire only dissolved in 1368. Thus un effect what took almost 142 years for the Mongols happened to Alexander within a couple of decades. That's a testament to Genghis's power and skill.

The Mongol empire became the largest empire in human history, and what's more it not only DID NOT FALL APART after Genghis' death, but instead grew, reaching its greatest extent in 1279 AD 52 years after his death. That's the legacy Genghis left.

This should prove instructive

Click the image to open in full size.

Quote:
Great Khan
- 1206–1227 Genghis Khan
- 1229–1241 ÷gedei Khan
- 1246–1248 GŁyŁk Khan
- 1251–1259 MŲngke Khan
- 1260–1294 Kublai Khan
Religions - Tengrism,Buddhism,Islam, Christianity.

Genghis empire opened up the Silk routes again, bringing prosperity and stability to the regions. He allowed freedom of religion AND culture.

Yes Genghis was a great conqueror, and like all Great Conquerors he destroyed and annihilated cities that resisted and revolted.

A person can dispute his military successes given the clear superiority of generals such as Tsubutai and Jelme, but his legacy as a ruler and unifier is undeniable and possibly unmatched.

Last edited by tornada; October 7th, 2013 at 10:52 AM.
tornada is offline  
Old October 7th, 2013, 01:07 PM   #9
Historian
 
Joined: Jul 2013
From: USA
Posts: 2,515

Quote:
Originally Posted by tornada View Post
That's exactly the sort of euro-centrist BS that has used against Genghis' Empire. They absorbed local culture, so the empire fell apart? By that logic the Roman Empire never existed, seeing as they absorbed local cultures and religions. Alexander absorbed Persian Culture, so i suppose he never even conquered Persia. Genghis' Mongolians allowed local cultures to exist, that's a sign of their cultural superiority. The empire Genghis built survived as a single political unit for 88 years, and Mongol superiority for almost 150 years

Genghis empire was divided into administrative khanates, true. No ancient or medieval empire could become of that size and remain a single administrative unit. The empire remained under a single overall ruler from the time of Genghis to the death of Kublai Khan - that's 1206-1294 AD. Not 60 years, but 88 years. As a single unified unit. The fractured Khanates emerged as independent units post 1296 and the empire only dissolved in 1368. Thus un effect what took almost 142 years for the Mongols happened to Alexander within a couple of decades. That's a testament to Genghis's power and skill.

The Mongol empire became the largest empire in human history, and what's more it not only DID NOT FALL APART after Genghis' death, but instead grew, reaching its greatest extent in 1279 AD 52 years after his death. That's the legacy Genghis left.
As nations they did fall apart.....

So according to that logic, Alexander's empire didn't fall apart till Cleopatra was dethroned by Octavian?

As for the Roman Empire..."Western Roman empire" and "Eastern Roman empire" were not official different nations the different soverighties while the Mongol and Greek ones are. Dioclecian and Constantine set up the system to be one nation ruled by joint emperors.
For example, when Theodosis conquered the empire he divided the empire among his sons...but it was still one empire.

The Golden Horde and Illkhanate were not Mongol empires. They even excepted that claimed the Yuan dynasty as the official Mongol empire. So the empire fell in 1368 when the Ming overthrew them. But as a single entity fell in 1260.
Mrbsct is offline  
Old October 7th, 2013, 01:16 PM   #10

tornada's Avatar
Wind Lord
 
Joined: Mar 2013
From: India
Posts: 15,192
Blog Entries: 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrbsct View Post
As nations they did fall apart.....

So according to that logic, Alexander's empire didn't fall apart till Cleopatra was dethroned by Octavian?

As for the Roman Empire..."Western Roman empire" and "Eastern Roman empire" were not official different nations the different soverighties while the Mongol and Greek ones are. Dioclecian and Constantine set up the system to be one nation ruled by joint emperors.
For example, when Theodosis conquered the empire he divided the empire among his sons...but it was still one empire.

The Golden Horde and Illkhanate were not Mongol empires. They even excepted that claimed the Yuan dynasty as the official Mongol empire. So the empire fell in 1368 when the Ming overthrew them. But as a single entity fell in 1260.
The empire became independent units after the Death of Kubla Khan in 1294 who was the last Gur-Khan of the Mongol empire (minus Toghan Temur Khan who unified the Mongol nation). The empire did not fall apart after the death of Mongke Khan. There was a civil war, true enough, but it remained a unified empire under the rule of Kubla Khan, after the war. The individual Khanates had autonomy true, but that's like arguing that Satraps in Persia were independent rulers. Compare this to Alexander where his empire was carved up within a few years of his death. Genghis empire grew after his death and was only carved up after post the death of Kubla. Before that the individual Khans of the Khanates had autonomy but were answerable to the Gur-Khan
tornada is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Asian History

Tags
commander, genghis, khan, military, uniter



Search tags for this page
Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Who was Steiner? Good military general or not? HistoryFreak1912 War and Military History 13 December 27th, 2013 09:57 AM
Was Archduke Charles of Teschen a good commander. MarshallBudyonny War and Military History 18 June 1st, 2013 02:59 PM
Was the US military really that good? Mike Lynch War and Military History 410 April 9th, 2013 04:13 PM
Good division commander =/= good corps commander Naomasa298 War and Military History 16 September 30th, 2012 09:12 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.