Thanks to my friend Matt Capua, Frank Perrin, Marco Boldrini and Hikma History for their assistance with this one. Please consider checking out Perrin's work with Rafmafzar, a group dedicated to reconstructing the historical martial arts of Iran: th-cam.com/users/RazmafzarTV And Hikma History, for the history of the Islamic World: th-cam.com/video/68jqNK5sZq8/w-d-xo.html
I am not trying to show the Mongol Empire as totally unique and independent compared to other nomadic or Turkic empires. It just happens to be where most of my knowledge is, and Kings and Generals pays me to write specifically on the Mongol army. I try to link it to earlier empires when I can, but I do not always do this as effectively as I want. Generally Kings and Generals wants the focus on the Mongols, rather than me spending part of an episode talking about the Liao or Gokturks. If I had time and was paid to, I would write for them a series on the military of the Gokturks, but that is not what they asked, nor could I do that as effectively as someone who specializes in these areas. And I must reiterate, I do not include information that I could not find in medieval sources, or from the work of well respected historians.
@Baghatur Tarkhan 1- My understanding on the Xiongnu and decimal system is based on what I've read in English scholarship. That is, part of the reason for the Xiongnu's longevity was it's decentralized nature. The Shanyu was a warleader or meditator in peace, whose power was not as pervasive throughout the society compared to the early rulers of the Mongol Empire. Because of this, it's assumed that the tribes making up the Xiongnu confederation strongly retained their identity, operating within their own tribal structures but providing tribute and official obedience to the Shanyu. You are correct though in that we sadly do not have information to speak much more specifically on the Xiongnus’ internal structure
@Baghatur Tarkhan 2- Saying Chinggis Khan broke down the tribes completely is an exaggeration on my part; you rightly pointed out previously that Marco Polo noted Merkit still in Mongolia, and the existence of the Jalayirids as a group after the disintegration of the Ilkhanate obviously points to the fact the Jalayirid identity did not disappear between 1206 to 1335. Respectfully though, I believe you are minimizing this as well. Chinggis Khan broke down the political ties which challenged him (i.e, the old Khans), ties which were very important for the organization of these tribes.
For further evidence, again I must cite passages directly from the Secret History of the Mongols. The vast majority of modern English scholarship from highly respected historians (Atwood, May, the esteemed dr. de Rachewiltz among many others) who are far more knowledgeable than I am, support this idea and the general reliability of the SHM on this topic, and I can provide a bibliography on the matter should you desire. The SHM may overstate some things, and is affected by Toluid biases (assuming a composition around 1252, as suggested by Christopher Atwood) but I do not see why it would be unreliable on this particular matter; at the very least, it supports that the Mongol imperial court in the 1250s saw this as something that had happened. Furthermore, historians like Christopher Atwood see the Secret History as coming from the same class of official histories that Rashid al-Din, the Shengwu Qinzheng lu and the materials that made up the Yuan Shih. The idea being they all reflect, largely, post-1250 Toluid biases, with Rashid, the Shengwu Qinzheng lu and Yuan Shih reflecting biases post-1260, following the division of the empire and Kublai’s victory over Ariq Boke, and accompanying need to legitimize his ascension. I’ll list below several extracts from the Secret History of the Mongols that reflect this specifically. Paragraph 154- “We shall measure the Tatars against the linchpin of a cart, And kill them to the last one, We shall utterly slay them. The rest we shall enslave; Some here, some there, dividing them among ourselves,” From the section on the slaughter of the Tatars in 1202. The idea is discussed to spread the Tatars among the Mongols. It’s not explicitly stated that it happens, as following this the Tatar prisoners rise up and Temujin orders a general slaughter of the males he has captured. Presumably the women and children were then divided among the Mongols. Paragraph 187- “When the Mongols subjugated the Kereyit people, they distributed them among each other so that nobody went short. They distributed the Tumen Tube’en and they all took of them until they had plenty. They despoiled the Olong Dongqayit in less than a day. As for the brave Jirgin who used to strip the blood-stained clothing and possessions from the enemy, they divided and apportioned them, but could not give some to everybody. Having in this way annihilated the Kereyit people, Chinggis Khan spent that winter at Abji’a Kodeger.” The Tumen Tube’en, Olong Dongqayit, Jirgin, were substribe of the Kereyit nation. Considering that Mongke Khaan’s mother Sorhaktani was a Kereyit who lived through this (and againing, this is assuming a composition of the Secret History in 1252) I do not see why such a description would be unreliable. To me, it seems certain Chinggis dismantled and dispersed the Kereyit. Sections 202 and 225 describe the creation and expansion of the keshig. Here, the units are built entirely from the sons and brothers of the unit commanders of the main army. The tumen of the keshig was thus not comprised of any specific tribe. Section 203: “and he said, ‘when, protected by Eternal heaven, I am engaged in bringing the entire people under my sway, be Eyes for me to see with, Ears for me to hear with. Divide up all the subject people and apportion them to our mother, to Us, to our younger brothers, and sons according to the name of the people. Splitting up those that live in felt-walled tents, Separating those that live in dwellings with wooden doors.” Again, this is just another section describing dividing up the people. 207,; “Further he order: on top of the three thousand Ba’arin that he already leads, Qorci, together with Taqai and Asiq, shall add to the number so as to make up a full ten thousand with the Cinos of the Adarkin, the To’olos and the Telengut, and Qorci shall be their commander.” Here, Qorci is to order make a tumen from various subtribes. Now, in this case it’s not completely breaking up the tribes though; rather, the implication seems to be “1,000 from one group, 1,000 from another, 1,000 from another,” rather than 10,000 men picked at random from various Turks or Mongols. Further, through the quriltai of 1206, two commanders are mentioned asking Chinggis for permission to assemble their brothers, who had split amongst the tribes. If there was not some sort of tribal division going on, I don’t see why they would need to relocate their brothers from various places. One thing which surprised me going through the Secret History again, is that no mention is made of the Naiman being divided like the Kereyit. The SHM is very specific in saying how the Kereyit were broken up, but with the Naiman the leadership is merely replaced, due to the death of Tayang Khan, Buiruk Khan and Chinggis’ marriage to Gurbesu. That the larger Naiman were not broken up thusly (perhaps the existing division among them caused by the conflict between Buiruk and Tayang was seen as sufficient?) could explain later mentions of full Naiman units, and why the Naiman name continued to exist in western asia after the Mongol Empire. I am quite convinced that the Kereyit were split up. As the Kereyit were one of the most numerous peoples in Mongolia at the time, and constituted many subtribes, such a dispersal would have have a major impact on the composition of the emerging Mongol Empire. It’s possible as well that some of the Tatars were also subject to this. However, I will say this. Since this isn’t specifically described to other tribes (sections in both SHM and Rashid al-Din will often just have a group surrender, with no further detail beyond that) it is possible that historians (myself included) have, without due diligence, extended this onto other peoples Temujin conquered in Mongolia as well. Possibly the Shengwu Qinzheng lu or Yuan Shih have such references which imply this for other tribes, but I do not have access to enough of either source in order to investigate that myself. Another piece of evidence one could also use, is that for the Northern Yuan-Qing period, the Chinese sources do not describe a total continuity of tribal names after the Mongol Empire. Some do continue on both sides of Chinggisid rule, obviously, the Oirat being the most famous. But the emergence of completely new tribal organizations after the Mongol Empire seems suggestive that the old ones had been replaced, or subsumed and reorganized for the Chinggisid hierarchy.
@Baghatur Tarkhan 3- Rashid al-Din’s numbers can be aligned with the Secret History. The figure of 95,000 comes from the assumption that the minggans in 1206 were full strength. Of course, this is certianly not the case. Some were more, some were less. The fact that all 95 minggan commanders are listed by the Secret History makes me think there really was 95 minggan commanders in 1206. But many authors assume minggans may have rarely been at more than 60% strength. So that would allow for a troop strength in 1206 at about 60,000. But I think we can never get more than a rough idea on the matter. 95,000 is useful enough as a general marker.
@Baghatur Tarkhan 4- I don’t believe I suggested in that video that the Mongols were any more disciplined than other steppe armies. When a steppe empire is at its height, and its rulers charismatic and winning battles, I think all steppe troops are very disciplined. When the rulers weaken and there are competitors to leadership, this discipline weakens. Troops get soft, it’s unclear which commander is backed by heaven and the victories stop coming as easily. Gokturks, Seljuqs and Mongol all enjoyed disciplined armies during the height of their expansion, and all suffered later on during their declines. Nothing I’ve read on the Khwarezmian Empire (you are referring to the Anushteginids?) indicates any remarkable levels of discipline or loyalty. For Mamluks? Yea, they were more professional and disciplined troops than the Mongols. Personally, I would say the Mamluks were probably the finest individual soldiers of the medieval world. I do not think it is any coincidence the Mamluks were so routinely effective against the Ilkhanate. The Gokturks and Seljuqs are topics I would really love to learn more about. If you have recommendations on good articles or primary sources on them, I would love to check them out.
Clicked faster than Timur's march to Ankara behind Beyezid's back. Since you've come so close to the Ottomans; is there any chance that you might do Ottoman arms and armor during this period or any other period?
Not likely for Ottomans. Much of this video would have some overlap for early Ottoman armour. I don't have much of a background on the Ottomans, and I want the focus of the channel to be the more nomadic empires. There are a couple Ottoman related topics I'd like to explore, given time though (like Ottoman relations with the Crimean Tatars).
@@theonlygoodlookinghabsburg2081 they are very little ottoman miniatures from before the last decade of the 15th century and they only became more numerous in the mid 16th century in archives. You can also blame collections for not making this stuff more available but in general their seem to indeed be a lack. Regardless outside the jalayrid miniatures probably produced in the 1360-80's, we have extremely little depictions of armor, miniatures or others from the Islamic world. Timurid miniatures seems to appear according to surviving pieces around the last decade of the 14th century and only become very numerous by the 1420's where we see a boom in their production.
Was the dude in lamino-lamellar wearing little faces on his aventail? If so that's badass man. Great video as always and thanks for introducing your friend's badass channel man.
@Arda it shouldn't be called that really, those war masks are not restricted to them nor originate among them. Face mask with top pivots exist in the Caucasus and Eastern orthodox world since the 10th century at least. However it's under the Anatolian seljuks we first see it depicted in art with the classical large pointed mustaches. We indeed have finds of masked helmets from the northern balkans and Ukraine, where numerous pontic turkic tribes such as the cumans roomed. However their is some debates regarding the attribution of all those masks to the cumans, as well as their datings, some people thinking they could be from the 14th century golden horde. In his case Marco is using a masked helmet inspired by one of the remaining Jalayrid miniatures showing a face mask. How in the original painting it as a lower face and neck protection of laminar type. This liberty can safely be taken as such masked helmets worn with mail aventail are seen before and after it, some later 15th century miniatures and surviving examples from northern Iran/Azerbaijan confirm the Aq Qoyunlu turkman used it, and even some 16th century crimean khanate decorative exemples. If anything it should be referred as turkic face mask as it existed before and after cumans.
Hello William, I am that dude =) What you see on the round ear guards next to the facemask are not small faces, but just the laces that I used to fix the ear guards to the warmask. You can see it in real life in this picture: imgur.com/a/DFEllAW
@@gasmonkey1000 A very interesting thought! You made me think of the fact that the whole facemask helmet concept could be somehow considered related to heroic armour, not in the sense that it was necessarily designed to recall the splendours of a glorious past, but rather in the sense that it could really bestow an aura of heroism upon the wearer, making him look like an immortal statue. The affinity with grotesque armour is also very consistent, as one of the main purposes of the warmask design was to instill fear and awe in the eyes of the enemies.
Complete coincidence (really!) When I saw al-Muqamiddah had put one up on Temur, I was completely surprised by that as well. Sometimes it just happens. If it's intentional, we'll make reference to it in the video. Temur's most famous battle was Ankara in 1402, which was in late July. But we all missed that by a week or two...
Do you do the drawings yourself? At animation school we each had to make a fake trailer for a movie or show that didn't exist and I made mine about Timur. The title was 'Tamerlane: Conqueror of Asia' I think I made a few mistakes...
Yes! All maps and drawings are by me; saves on worrying about copyright and things, and I get to show exactly what I want rather than make do with what I can access.
Justin Marozzi's 'Sword of Islam' is ok, a little bland but ok. As great a figure as Timur was, there haven't been too much secondary literature on him tbh.
Beatrice Forbes Manz's "the Rise and Rule of Tamerlane," (1989) is the closest I think Temur has to a "standard biography," in English, though it's a little dated now. It's probably the best I could recommend if you wanted a specific book just on him. Most of what I used on Temur in my research on him, both here and for Kings and Generals, was primary sources from the period (some of which I can link you)or chapters from larger scholarly works like the Cambridge History series. If you are looking for that, I can send you some through email, but they generally only look at a section of his life, rather than a whole. Temur is one of those guys who shows up in a lot of books (because he campaigned everywhere!) but doesn't get a lot focused just on him, so it makes it hard to really recommend stuff on him unless you want a full reading list.
I think it's not unreasonable, though not the full picture. Basically, the argument is like this: Temur was not born in the steppe, or living as a nomad. He was born near Samarkand, in the nobility of the Barlas tribe. The Barlas were traditionally nomadic, but it's hard to say how nomadic the nobility was by the 1330s, when Temur was born. Part of the argument is that the Barlas leaders basically supported themselves off tribute from true nomads, and from local cities and towns. Some people go as far as to say they never partook in any seasonal migration, but I find that unlikely. At the very least, they would have preferred summer and winter areas, even if they weren't moving to personally manage their herds. They weren't living in the cities, but they were spending time in them, and partaking in Persian culture. The idea of this argument is that Temur was raised basically right outside of the major centers of Transoxians/Mawaranahr, rather in any truly pastoral nomadic environment, and the most important immediate influences on him were normally from sedentary, Islamic, Iranian society. Reading through Temur's life, he understood Iranian culture, language and imagery very well; but he also understood how to use nomadic, and specifically Chinggisid imagery to justify himself to nomads, and never learned to read or write, though he was educated through oral lessons. Personally, I think he was a man with a foot in both worlds. He was not a steppe nomad, but he wasn't fully Iranian. But he knew both cultures well enough to appeal to both when it suited him. Hopefully that makes sense; it is very late when I am writing this, so I may have forgotten something.
@@TheJackmeisterMongolHistory thank you🙏 I thought the arguement was gone be about how he only conquered greater iran and did some persian things instead of his origions😅 This makes me think of alexander relations with greeks would you say this is a good comparison? And what would be Timurs self identification? O and is the we are all turks and from turan ... really from him becouse i havent seen it in any of sources i have read
@@arianrezaie4729 A comprehensive history of Iran in the early fifteenth century, under the Timurids, a Turkic dynasty of nomadic origin. www.amazon.com/Politics-Religion-Timurid-Cambridge-Civilization/dp/0521865476
@@Orgil. No. The people who lived there where mostly of Turkic ancestry. Also Chagatai is a Turkic Name exactly like Chinggis Khaans name which is of Turkic Origin not Mongolian.
@@okaninhoo have you ever heard Mongol language ? Chinggis means Sea.Chagatai means White ,tai means belong to someone.You know turkic language come from Mongolia right ? Most of historians agree on altai language family this includes Turkic,Mongolic and Tungusic languages.
@@Orgil. There are lots of Turkic Words in Mongolian Language no doubt. Chinggis is a Turkic word called "Tengiz" which means Sea. Also Temur means Steel in Turkic Languages. The Altay Language Theory is not widely accepted anymore and its an old theory. By the way the Gokturks also spoke Turkic Language and not Mongolian. You can read the Orkhon Inscriptions and you will see :)
The only thing I've ever gotten around to doing on Temür (do to my own time constraints), was a three part series I wrote on him for Kings and Generals. You can watch part one here: th-cam.com/video/y95sYUkQJuA/w-d-xo.html
I think when I released this video I had timed it to release with one of the Kings and Generals Temür videos. Later this year, we might do a podcast series on him, depending on how things go. At the moment it's unlikely I get around to doing videos on him on this channel- not that he's not interesting, but just because I have a lot of other ideas planned that I'd like to do first (and I don't want to promise too many things and never deliver on them for years)
For quite a while I assumed that plate gauntlets were limited to West Europe and wearing them with vaguely "Eastern" armor was an anachronism limited to buhurt for safety. Apparently not - interesting to see their use described in the video.
Timurid armys armor are very similar to Mughal armor.
3 หลายเดือนก่อน
Emir Timur has never been Mongol, infact he fought with Mongol tribes and states. Timur was a Turk empire, talking Turkish, his high ranked were all Turks. The expression Turko-Mongol is just created to dilute or hide the influence and power of Turk existance around Turkistan between 3.th and 15th century. Turkistan is what eurocentrics call central asia today. But this so called central asia has been always called as Turkistan by Iranians, Chinese, Romans and Byzantinses. Do not let some people change the historical realities. Yes Turks and Mongols are relatives, you may call them like cousens, also Koreans and some Japanese tribes are also relatives with Turks, just like some first nations of America continent. But Timur was a Turk empire from Tashkent where is capital of Uzbekistan today. It is unfortunatelly a western type of ununderstanding, like calling all asian sterotypes as chinese! Timur was Turk, Tashkent during Timur era, was cultural capital of Turkistan.
This is random but I am Indian-Afghan half European my Dad who is Afghan-Indian left when I was young so I don’t no very much about my origin. But my Last name is Teymuri and Timur sounds similar to my last name and Timir also means Iron in Old Turkic. Does anyone know if these are connected?
Most Afghan last names shows which tribes they belong to or What their forefathers were named. Based on your name i would say you have Timurid ancestors, which later moved from Afghanistan region to India.
How similar was Timurid and Golden Horde army structure and unit terminology to the Unified Mongol Empire times? Did Mongolian units and organization survived to their time? Such as the 1 mingghan strong Baatar Khisigten and Khorchi inside the Khan's own Khisig; Turghagut and Khevtuul day-night bodyguards; Tamma territorial army; Alginchi forward scouts to the Tamma; Tserig troops levied from sedentary population; Tabghur frontier service; employment of Kharash in assaulting cities; etc. I know that in Safavid Iran their royal bodyguards were called the Qurchi, which name I suspect derived from the Khorchi; and the the term Cerik lives on until Qajar period; - thus it is likely Ilkhanate and Timurids have those as well. However I don't know whether the Golden Horde maintains such standing units or systems. Did Timurids also used the more feudal Iranian units as well such as the Visak comprised of the Pushandar/Tiyuldaran/Mulazim bringing his Qolloghchi, Tirkashband/Jaridah, and Yaya/Piyadegan with him (somewhat similar to an European Knight and his Lance)?
As far s we are aware, for both the Golden Horde and early Timurids, the same decimal organization (arban/jaghun/minghaan/tumen) continued to be used by both. The specific terminology is harder to pinpoint: tumen seems to have been kept as a term, but hazar/hazara mostly replaces minghan from what I can tell. Since this is mostly being described by Persian authors though, whether this was the specific terms being used by the largely Turkic military in both states is hard to say with direct certainty. For the Golden Horde, we are lacking enough detail to really say which terms and positions, such as those within the Keshig, actually continued to be used, but I suspect many were. There is no immediate dramatic change to its military structure at that level which would cause them to be dropped. The changes to the Golden Horde army seem to be more in its general organization (i.e, how the troops were levied, the emergence of the qarachi beys) rather than to its specific structure. With the Timurids, we do have a bit more detail. Some of the specific titles of the mid-13th century Mongol keshig do continue under the Timurids (things like qorchi, ba'urchi etc.). The question is whether these are merely just titles, or indicate the holder actually held that function. The difference in focus of the sources though, makes it harder to clearly describe army structure under Temur. Mongol army leadership was generally much more collaborative, power more readily delegated to commanders- famous generals like Jebe, Subutai, Mukhali, Chormaqun, etc., from outside the imperial family, and many others, all chosen from the keshig. Because of this proliferation of commanders, we encounter the titles and positions far more commonly, and actually see the mongolian army structure in practice. Temur meanwhile was so absolutely paranoid of delegating power to anyone, fearing they' betray him (considering one of his favourite tricks was encouraging enemy defections, it's easy to see how he feared it happening to himself) that he refused to let anyone else lead a major army while he was alive. Most of the top positions in the army where held by his sons and grandsons, rather than generals who rose to the positions: we simply encounter the ranks far less commonly under the Timurids than we do the Mongols. Temur's army structure was definitely along the lines of the Mongolian, for most of that was a variation upon the tradition army structure of Turkic and Mongolian steppe nomads. For Temur, it was very personal though, meddling with who held what positions as it suited him, keeping the army constantly on campaign, governors rotating, in order to prevent any of them from developing alternate power sources to challenge him. That's why I wonder if the keshig titles (qorchi, ba'atar, turhagut) actually referred to ranks and positions, or were granted to please a suboridnate and keep him feeling important.
As well, I have not read about Temur ever using Tamma units. He often used local powers raised for his armies, and they probably made up most garrisons as he required them. But he never, to my knowledge, employed the sort of strategy which tamma units entail. alqinchi were used, as that is one of those staple components of the inner Asian nomad army. Neither have I read about him really utilizing specific Iranian units. He certainly employed their armourers and weapon makers, and relied on them as his infantry, foot archers etc. But the largest and most important arm of his force seems, from all the primary sources I've read, was nomadic cavalry, mainly horse archers. Some descriptions of the Timurid army in early 15th century are very reminiscent of 13th century descriptions of the Mongols. It's to the point that some sources simply call Temur's forces "the Chagatais." Most of Temur's campaigns were very long distance- it was not unusual for him to march all the way across Iran in a single season. It seems what he would generally do, is march from Samarkand with his main body of Chagatai horsemen, with whom he'd march the greatest length of the journey (for reasons of speed, forage etc.). As he neared the target of the campaign, he would then raise local forces- either allied troops, or forced conscriptions, to serve him in other roles.
Great Video man can you please make a video on how people who lived centuries after the death of Chinggis Khan were influenced by him like Babur of the Mughals and Adolf Hitler of the Nazis
Thanks to my friend Matt Capua, Frank Perrin, Marco Boldrini and Hikma History for their assistance with this one. Please consider checking out Perrin's work with Rafmafzar, a group dedicated to reconstructing the historical martial arts of Iran: th-cam.com/users/RazmafzarTV
And Hikma History, for the history of the Islamic World: th-cam.com/video/68jqNK5sZq8/w-d-xo.html
I am not trying to show the Mongol Empire as totally unique and independent compared to other nomadic or Turkic empires. It just happens to be where most of my knowledge is, and Kings and Generals pays me to write specifically on the Mongol army. I try to link it to earlier empires when I can, but I do not always do this as effectively as I want. Generally Kings and Generals wants the focus on the Mongols, rather than me spending part of an episode talking about the Liao or Gokturks. If I had time and was paid to, I would write for them a series on the military of the Gokturks, but that is not what they asked, nor could I do that as effectively as someone who specializes in these areas.
And I must reiterate, I do not include information that I could not find in medieval sources, or from the work of well respected historians.
@Baghatur Tarkhan 1- My understanding on the Xiongnu and decimal system is based on what I've read in English scholarship. That is, part of the reason for the Xiongnu's longevity was it's decentralized nature. The Shanyu was a warleader or meditator in peace, whose power was not as pervasive throughout the society compared to the early rulers of the Mongol Empire. Because of this, it's assumed that the tribes making up the Xiongnu confederation strongly retained their identity, operating within their own tribal structures but providing tribute and official obedience to the Shanyu. You are correct though in that we sadly do not have information to speak much more specifically on the Xiongnus’ internal structure
@Baghatur Tarkhan 2- Saying Chinggis Khan broke down the tribes completely is an exaggeration on my part; you rightly pointed out previously that Marco Polo noted Merkit still in Mongolia, and the existence of the Jalayirids as a group after the disintegration of the Ilkhanate obviously points to the fact the Jalayirid identity did not disappear between 1206 to 1335. Respectfully though, I believe you are minimizing this as well. Chinggis Khan broke down the political ties which challenged him (i.e, the old Khans), ties which were very important for the organization of these tribes.
For further evidence, again I must cite passages directly from the Secret History of the Mongols. The vast majority of modern English scholarship from highly respected historians (Atwood, May, the esteemed dr. de Rachewiltz among many others) who are far more knowledgeable than I am, support this idea and the general reliability of the SHM on this topic, and I can provide a bibliography on the matter should you desire.
The SHM may overstate some things, and is affected by Toluid biases (assuming a composition around 1252, as suggested by Christopher Atwood) but I do not see why it would be unreliable on this particular matter; at the very least, it supports that the Mongol imperial court in the 1250s saw this as something that had happened. Furthermore, historians like Christopher Atwood see the Secret History as coming from the same class of official histories that Rashid al-Din, the Shengwu Qinzheng lu and the materials that made up the Yuan Shih. The idea being they all reflect, largely, post-1250 Toluid biases, with Rashid, the Shengwu Qinzheng lu and Yuan Shih reflecting biases post-1260, following the division of the empire and Kublai’s victory over Ariq Boke, and accompanying need to legitimize his ascension. I’ll list below several extracts from the Secret History of the Mongols that reflect this specifically.
Paragraph 154- “We shall measure the Tatars against the linchpin of a cart,
And kill them to the last one,
We shall utterly slay them.
The rest we shall enslave;
Some here, some there, dividing them among ourselves,”
From the section on the slaughter of the Tatars in 1202. The idea is discussed to spread the Tatars among the Mongols. It’s not explicitly stated that it happens, as following this the Tatar prisoners rise up and Temujin orders a general slaughter of the males he has captured. Presumably the women and children were then divided among the Mongols.
Paragraph 187- “When the Mongols subjugated the Kereyit people, they distributed them among each other so that nobody went short. They distributed the Tumen Tube’en and they all took of them until they had plenty. They despoiled the Olong Dongqayit in less than a day. As for the brave Jirgin who used to strip the blood-stained clothing and possessions from the enemy, they divided and apportioned them, but could not give some to everybody. Having in this way annihilated the Kereyit people, Chinggis Khan spent that winter at Abji’a Kodeger.”
The Tumen Tube’en, Olong Dongqayit, Jirgin, were substribe of the Kereyit nation. Considering that Mongke Khaan’s mother Sorhaktani was a Kereyit who lived through this (and againing, this is assuming a composition of the Secret History in 1252) I do not see why such a description would be unreliable. To me, it seems certain Chinggis dismantled and dispersed the Kereyit.
Sections 202 and 225 describe the creation and expansion of the keshig. Here, the units are built entirely from the sons and brothers of the unit commanders of the main army. The tumen of the keshig was thus not comprised of any specific tribe.
Section 203: “and he said, ‘when, protected by Eternal heaven, I am engaged in bringing the entire people under my sway, be
Eyes for me to see with,
Ears for me to hear with.
Divide up all the subject people and apportion them to our mother, to Us, to our younger brothers, and sons according to the name of the people.
Splitting up those that live in felt-walled tents,
Separating those that live in dwellings with wooden doors.”
Again, this is just another section describing dividing up the people.
207,; “Further he order: on top of the three thousand Ba’arin that he already leads, Qorci, together with Taqai and Asiq, shall add to the number so as to make up a full ten thousand with the Cinos of the Adarkin, the To’olos and the Telengut, and Qorci shall be their commander.”
Here, Qorci is to order make a tumen from various subtribes. Now, in this case it’s not completely breaking up the tribes though; rather, the implication seems to be “1,000 from one group, 1,000 from another, 1,000 from another,” rather than 10,000 men picked at random from various Turks or Mongols.
Further, through the quriltai of 1206, two commanders are mentioned asking Chinggis for permission to assemble their brothers, who had split amongst the tribes. If there was not some sort of tribal division going on, I don’t see why they would need to relocate their brothers from various places.
One thing which surprised me going through the Secret History again, is that no mention is made of the Naiman being divided like the Kereyit. The SHM is very specific in saying how the Kereyit were broken up, but with the Naiman the leadership is merely replaced, due to the death of Tayang Khan, Buiruk Khan and Chinggis’ marriage to Gurbesu. That the larger Naiman were not broken up thusly (perhaps the existing division among them caused by the conflict between Buiruk and Tayang was seen as sufficient?) could explain later mentions of full Naiman units, and why the Naiman name continued to exist in western asia after the Mongol Empire.
I am quite convinced that the Kereyit were split up. As the Kereyit were one of the most numerous peoples in Mongolia at the time, and constituted many subtribes, such a dispersal would have have a major impact on the composition of the emerging Mongol Empire. It’s possible as well that some of the Tatars were also subject to this. However, I will say this. Since this isn’t specifically described to other tribes (sections in both SHM and Rashid al-Din will often just have a group surrender, with no further detail beyond that) it is possible that historians (myself included) have, without due diligence, extended this onto other peoples Temujin conquered in Mongolia as well. Possibly the Shengwu Qinzheng lu or Yuan Shih have such references which imply this for other tribes, but I do not have access to enough of either source in order to investigate that myself.
Another piece of evidence one could also use, is that for the Northern Yuan-Qing period, the Chinese sources do not describe a total continuity of tribal names after the Mongol Empire. Some do continue on both sides of Chinggisid rule, obviously, the Oirat being the most famous. But the emergence of completely new tribal organizations after the Mongol Empire seems suggestive that the old ones had been replaced, or subsumed and reorganized for the Chinggisid hierarchy.
@Baghatur Tarkhan 3- Rashid al-Din’s numbers can be aligned with the Secret History. The figure of 95,000 comes from the assumption that the minggans in 1206 were full strength. Of course, this is certianly not the case. Some were more, some were less. The fact that all 95 minggan commanders are listed by the Secret History makes me think there really was 95 minggan commanders in 1206. But many authors assume minggans may have rarely been at more than 60% strength. So that would allow for a troop strength in 1206 at about 60,000. But I think we can never get more than a rough idea on the matter. 95,000 is useful enough as a general marker.
@Baghatur Tarkhan 4- I don’t believe I suggested in that video that the Mongols were any more disciplined than other steppe armies. When a steppe empire is at its height, and its rulers charismatic and winning battles, I think all steppe troops are very disciplined. When the rulers weaken and there are competitors to leadership, this discipline weakens. Troops get soft, it’s unclear which commander is backed by heaven and the victories stop coming as easily. Gokturks, Seljuqs and Mongol all enjoyed disciplined armies during the height of their expansion, and all suffered later on during their declines. Nothing I’ve read on the Khwarezmian Empire (you are referring to the Anushteginids?) indicates any remarkable levels of discipline or loyalty.
For Mamluks? Yea, they were more professional and disciplined troops than the Mongols. Personally, I would say the Mamluks were probably the finest individual soldiers of the medieval world. I do not think it is any coincidence the Mamluks were so routinely effective against the Ilkhanate.
The Gokturks and Seljuqs are topics I would really love to learn more about. If you have recommendations on good articles or primary sources on them, I would love to check them out.
Assisting you on this one was a pleasure. It's an honor having my armour featured in your video! :)
Man, this came out great, honoured to have been a part of it!
Clicked faster than Timur's march to Ankara behind Beyezid's back.
Since you've come so close to the Ottomans; is there any chance that you might do Ottoman arms and armor during this period or any other period?
Not likely for Ottomans. Much of this video would have some overlap for early Ottoman armour. I don't have much of a background on the Ottomans, and I want the focus of the channel to be the more nomadic empires.
There are a couple Ottoman related topics I'd like to explore, given time though (like Ottoman relations with the Crimean Tatars).
@@TheJackmeisterMongolHistory Oh I would really love to see you cover the Crimean Tatars at some point!
He probably couldn't do ottoman arms and armor before 1453 because literally nothing is known of it
@@theghosthero6173 There are no miniatures from before 1453? :o
@@theonlygoodlookinghabsburg2081 they are very little ottoman miniatures from before the last decade of the 15th century and they only became more numerous in the mid 16th century in archives. You can also blame collections for not making this stuff more available but in general their seem to indeed be a lack. Regardless outside the jalayrid miniatures probably produced in the 1360-80's, we have extremely little depictions of armor, miniatures or others from the Islamic world. Timurid miniatures seems to appear according to surviving pieces around the last decade of the 14th century and only become very numerous by the 1420's where we see a boom in their production.
Awesome, great to see Timurid stuff on the channel!
Another great video as always.❤❤
Was the dude in lamino-lamellar wearing little faces on his aventail? If so that's badass man. Great video as always and thanks for introducing your friend's badass channel man.
@Arda it shouldn't be called that really, those war masks are not restricted to them nor originate among them. Face mask with top pivots exist in the Caucasus and Eastern orthodox world since the 10th century at least. However it's under the Anatolian seljuks we first see it depicted in art with the classical large pointed mustaches. We indeed have finds of masked helmets from the northern balkans and Ukraine, where numerous pontic turkic tribes such as the cumans roomed. However their is some debates regarding the attribution of all those masks to the cumans, as well as their datings, some people thinking they could be from the 14th century golden horde. In his case Marco is using a masked helmet inspired by one of the remaining Jalayrid miniatures showing a face mask. How in the original painting it as a lower face and neck protection of laminar type. This liberty can safely be taken as such masked helmets worn with mail aventail are seen before and after it, some later 15th century miniatures and surviving examples from northern Iran/Azerbaijan confirm the Aq Qoyunlu turkman used it, and even some 16th century crimean khanate decorative exemples. If anything it should be referred as turkic face mask as it existed before and after cumans.
Hello William, I am that dude =) What you see on the round ear guards next to the facemask are not small faces, but just the laces that I used to fix the ear guards to the warmask.
You can see it in real life in this picture: imgur.com/a/DFEllAW
@@marcoboldrini9138 Ah I see, thanks man. Thought it was part of some grotesque design in armor like in late medieval to Renaissance European armor.
@@gasmonkey1000 A very interesting thought! You made me think of the fact that the whole facemask helmet concept could be somehow considered related to heroic armour, not in the sense that it was necessarily designed to recall the splendours of a glorious past, but rather in the sense that it could really bestow an aura of heroism upon the wearer, making him look like an immortal statue. The affinity with grotesque armour is also very consistent, as one of the main purposes of the warmask design was to instill fear and awe in the eyes of the enemies.
@@marcoboldrini9138 yes also in Helellenistic and Roman times mostly it was probably used with this concept to look heroic
Finally Timur😍😍😍
The Direct Descendent of Chenghis Khan and Great muslim Conquer
The last conqueror before gunpowder era
Love all your videos so much
Are you gone do videos about scythians and cossacs ro just about altaic peoples
I didn’t know the Timurids still use the term Keshig?
Why are their a lot of Timur videos being released by historical youtubers this week?
Complete coincidence (really!) When I saw al-Muqamiddah had put one up on Temur, I was completely surprised by that as well. Sometimes it just happens. If it's intentional, we'll make reference to it in the video.
Temur's most famous battle was Ankara in 1402, which was in late July. But we all missed that by a week or two...
@@TheJackmeisterMongolHistory Kings and Generals uploaded a video about Timur th-cam.com/video/hIEIpQAz4PE/w-d-xo.html hmm..... Interesting
@@TheJackmeisterMongolHistory I think someone opened his grave and thus 2020 began ...
Do you do the drawings yourself?
At animation school we each had to make a fake trailer for a movie or show that didn't exist and I made mine about Timur.
The title was 'Tamerlane: Conqueror of Asia'
I think I made a few mistakes...
Yes! All maps and drawings are by me; saves on worrying about copyright and things, and I get to show exactly what I want rather than make do with what I can access.
I love Timur so muuuchch, is there any books you would recommend on him?
Justin Marozzi's 'Sword of Islam' is ok, a little bland but ok. As great a figure as Timur was, there haven't been too much secondary literature on him tbh.
He's one of my favorite historical figures, thank u for the reccomendation
@@elistarr8270 My pleasure, I did a video on him on my channel in case you're interested!
@@HikmaHistory sounds great! I'm already subbed so I'll make sure to check it out!
Beatrice Forbes Manz's "the Rise and Rule of Tamerlane," (1989) is the closest I think Temur has to a "standard biography," in English, though it's a little dated now. It's probably the best I could recommend if you wanted a specific book just on him. Most of what I used on Temur in my research on him, both here and for Kings and Generals, was primary sources from the period (some of which I can link you)or chapters from larger scholarly works like the Cambridge History series. If you are looking for that, I can send you some through email, but they generally only look at a section of his life, rather than a whole.
Temur is one of those guys who shows up in a lot of books (because he campaigned everywhere!) but doesn't get a lot focused just on him, so it makes it hard to really recommend stuff on him unless you want a full reading list.
Timur Great Turk
Turkified-Mongol💪
@@jihangirastra3851 sain vvv
@@jihangirastra3851 No. Keep crying.
What do you think about arguement that Timur was a peoduct of islamic iranian society and not step nomadic? And could you explain the arguement.
I think it's not unreasonable, though not the full picture.
Basically, the argument is like this: Temur was not born in the steppe, or living as a nomad. He was born near Samarkand, in the nobility of the Barlas tribe. The Barlas were traditionally nomadic, but it's hard to say how nomadic the nobility was by the 1330s, when Temur was born. Part of the argument is that the Barlas leaders basically supported themselves off tribute from true nomads, and from local cities and towns. Some people go as far as to say they never partook in any seasonal migration, but I find that unlikely. At the very least, they would have preferred summer and winter areas, even if they weren't moving to personally manage their herds.
They weren't living in the cities, but they were spending time in them, and partaking in Persian culture. The idea of this argument is that Temur was raised basically right outside of the major centers of Transoxians/Mawaranahr, rather in any truly pastoral nomadic environment, and the most important immediate influences on him were normally from sedentary, Islamic, Iranian society.
Reading through Temur's life, he understood Iranian culture, language and imagery very well; but he also understood how to use nomadic, and specifically Chinggisid imagery to justify himself to nomads, and never learned to read or write, though he was educated through oral lessons. Personally, I think he was a man with a foot in both worlds. He was not a steppe nomad, but he wasn't fully Iranian. But he knew both cultures well enough to appeal to both when it suited him.
Hopefully that makes sense; it is very late when I am writing this, so I may have forgotten something.
@@TheJackmeisterMongolHistory thank you🙏
I thought the arguement was gone be about how he only conquered greater iran and did some persian things instead of his origions😅
This makes me think of alexander relations with greeks would you say this is a good comparison?
And what would be Timurs self identification?
O and is the we are all turks and from turan ... really from him becouse i havent seen it in any of sources i have read
@Baghatur Tarkhan well thats not really true. You do have just as much making him more Iranian if not more that what makes him turko-mongol
@@arianrezaie4729
A comprehensive history of Iran in the early fifteenth century, under the Timurids, a Turkic dynasty of nomadic origin.
www.amazon.com/Politics-Religion-Timurid-Cambridge-Civilization/dp/0521865476
J-M172. Introduce l'histoire de l'asie, David-Leon Cahun, Barlas turkic Kureken tribe that first mentioned in 733. Timur Turk
Cool more Timur content
The Nirun Mongols included the following tribes: Adarkin, Artakan, Arulat, Baarin, Barlas, Borjigin, Bugunut, Budaat, Belgunut, Besut, Geniges, Jadaran, Joureid, Dzhurkin, Duglat, Durben, Kilingut (incl. Kilingut-Tarkhan) , Kingiyat, Kiyat, Kunjin, Mangut, Nir-khoyin, Noyokhon, Oronar, Saljiut, Sijiut, Sukan, Sukanut, Sunit, Tayzhiut, Ujiet, Urut, Khabturkhas, Khatagin, Khonkhotan, Chanshiut, Chonos, Yasar, etc. Darlekin group Mongols consisted of such tribes as Arulat[19], Bayat, Bugunut[20], Belgunut[20], Gorlos, Jalair, Ikires, Ildurkin, Kilingut[19] (including Kilingut-Tarkhan[19]), Kingit (Geniges)[ 19], kunjin[19], kunkliut, nokhos, olkhonut, suldus, uryankhai, uryaut (oronar)[19], ushin, haranut, khongirat, khonkhotan[19], eljigin, etc.
The empire of Genghis Khan included not only the indigenous Mongols, but also all the other Mongol-speaking tribes of the region: Bargut, Bekrin, Bulagachin, Dzhungurkin, Karakitai, Kereit, Kurlaut, Kem-Kemdzhiut, Kushtemi, Keremuchin, Merkit, Naiman, Oirat, Ongut, Sakait, Tangut, Tatars, Telengut, Tulas, Uymakut, Urasut, Khoyin-Irgen, Khoyin-Urianka, Khori-Tumat (Khori and Tumat), etc.
Chagatai Turks😍
Chagatai is mongolian
@@Orgil. No. The people who lived there where mostly of Turkic ancestry. Also Chagatai is a Turkic Name exactly like Chinggis Khaans name which is of Turkic Origin not Mongolian.
@@okaninhoo have you ever heard Mongol language ? Chinggis means Sea.Chagatai means White ,tai means belong to someone.You know turkic language come from Mongolia right ? Most of historians agree on altai language family this includes Turkic,Mongolic and Tungusic languages.
@@okaninhoo look at their dna test and cry 😂 they have high amount of Mongol blood.
@@Orgil. There are lots of Turkic Words in Mongolian Language no doubt. Chinggis is a Turkic word called "Tengiz" which means Sea. Also Temur means Steel in Turkic Languages. The Altay Language Theory is not widely accepted anymore and its an old theory. By the way the Gokturks also spoke Turkic Language and not Mongolian. You can read the Orkhon Inscriptions and you will see :)
Hey brother do you have any more about Timur I saw a comment you made a few years ago saying you would be covering it?
The only thing I've ever gotten around to doing on Temür (do to my own time constraints), was a three part series I wrote on him for Kings and Generals. You can watch part one here: th-cam.com/video/y95sYUkQJuA/w-d-xo.html
I think when I released this video I had timed it to release with one of the Kings and Generals Temür videos. Later this year, we might do a podcast series on him, depending on how things go. At the moment it's unlikely I get around to doing videos on him on this channel- not that he's not interesting, but just because I have a lot of other ideas planned that I'd like to do first (and I don't want to promise too many things and never deliver on them for years)
@@TheJackmeisterMongolHistory yes my bro K&G is how I found your channel in the first place !
@@TheJackmeisterMongolHistory you got a patreon? I haven’t done that before I would subscribe to you mate
👍 good video
Clicked so fast, I sacked Delhi by accident.
For quite a while I assumed that plate gauntlets were limited to West Europe and wearing them with vaguely "Eastern" armor was an anachronism limited to buhurt for safety. Apparently not - interesting to see their use described in the video.
I was surprised to learn of their use as well; though it was certainly limited usage and not widespread, there is evidence for them.
Turco-Mongol Armor with spear,bow and arrow,Sword and Large Sabre
Lol he said Gengis Khaan 😂😂😂
Sahiba Kauron Amir Timur Kurgan not Timur Lang
Timurid armys armor are very similar to Mughal armor.
Emir Timur has never been Mongol, infact he fought with Mongol tribes and states. Timur was a Turk empire, talking Turkish, his high ranked were all Turks. The expression Turko-Mongol is just created to dilute or hide the influence and power of Turk existance around Turkistan between 3.th and 15th century. Turkistan is what eurocentrics call central asia today. But this so called central asia has been always called as Turkistan by Iranians, Chinese, Romans and Byzantinses. Do not let some people change the historical realities. Yes Turks and Mongols are relatives, you may call them like cousens, also Koreans and some Japanese tribes are also relatives with Turks, just like some first nations of America continent. But Timur was a Turk empire from Tashkent where is capital of Uzbekistan today. It is unfortunatelly a western type of ununderstanding, like calling all asian sterotypes as chinese! Timur was Turk, Tashkent during Timur era, was cultural capital of Turkistan.
Dear gods tht voice is absolutely terrible. Couldn't watch more than a few seconds...
This is random but I am Indian-Afghan half European my Dad who is Afghan-Indian left when I was young so I don’t no very much about my origin. But my Last name is Teymuri and Timur sounds similar to my last name and Timir also means Iron in Old Turkic. Does anyone know if these are connected?
Most Afghan last names shows which tribes they belong to or What their forefathers were named. Based on your name i would say you have Timurid ancestors, which later moved from Afghanistan region to India.
And something about names. Timur is a name, but "Teymuri" or "Timuri" means "Of Timur" Which basically means, Descendant of Timur. Hope this helped
@@enny1231 Wow, that’s interesting thank you for this. Is there a particular tribe that is named it today?
@@enny1231 Thank you!!
How similar was Timurid and Golden Horde army structure and unit terminology to the Unified Mongol Empire times?
Did Mongolian units and organization survived to their time? Such as the 1 mingghan strong Baatar Khisigten and Khorchi inside the Khan's own Khisig; Turghagut and Khevtuul day-night bodyguards; Tamma territorial army; Alginchi forward scouts to the Tamma; Tserig troops levied from sedentary population; Tabghur frontier service; employment of Kharash in assaulting cities; etc.
I know that in Safavid Iran their royal bodyguards were called the Qurchi, which name I suspect derived from the Khorchi; and the the term Cerik lives on until Qajar period; - thus it is likely Ilkhanate and Timurids have those as well. However I don't know whether the Golden Horde maintains such standing units or systems.
Did Timurids also used the more feudal Iranian units as well such as the Visak comprised of the Pushandar/Tiyuldaran/Mulazim bringing his Qolloghchi, Tirkashband/Jaridah, and Yaya/Piyadegan with him (somewhat similar to an European Knight and his Lance)?
As far s we are aware, for both the Golden Horde and early Timurids, the same decimal organization (arban/jaghun/minghaan/tumen) continued to be used by both. The specific terminology is harder to pinpoint: tumen seems to have been kept as a term, but hazar/hazara mostly replaces minghan from what I can tell. Since this is mostly being described by Persian authors though, whether this was the specific terms being used by the largely Turkic military in both states is hard to say with direct certainty.
For the Golden Horde, we are lacking enough detail to really say which terms and positions, such as those within the Keshig, actually continued to be used, but I suspect many were. There is no immediate dramatic change to its military structure at that level which would cause them to be dropped. The changes to the Golden Horde army seem to be more in its general organization (i.e, how the troops were levied, the emergence of the qarachi beys) rather than to its specific structure.
With the Timurids, we do have a bit more detail. Some of the specific titles of the mid-13th century Mongol keshig do continue under the Timurids (things like qorchi, ba'urchi etc.). The question is whether these are merely just titles, or indicate the holder actually held that function. The difference in focus of the sources though, makes it harder to clearly describe army structure under Temur. Mongol army leadership was generally much more collaborative, power more readily delegated to commanders- famous generals like Jebe, Subutai, Mukhali, Chormaqun, etc., from outside the imperial family, and many others, all chosen from the keshig. Because of this proliferation of commanders, we encounter the titles and positions far more commonly, and actually see the mongolian army structure in practice.
Temur meanwhile was so absolutely paranoid of delegating power to anyone, fearing they' betray him (considering one of his favourite tricks was encouraging enemy defections, it's easy to see how he feared it happening to himself) that he refused to let anyone else lead a major army while he was alive. Most of the top positions in the army where held by his sons and grandsons, rather than generals who rose to the positions: we simply encounter the ranks far less commonly under the Timurids than we do the Mongols.
Temur's army structure was definitely along the lines of the Mongolian, for most of that was a variation upon the tradition army structure of Turkic and Mongolian steppe nomads. For Temur, it was very personal though, meddling with who held what positions as it suited him, keeping the army constantly on campaign, governors rotating, in order to prevent any of them from developing alternate power sources to challenge him. That's why I wonder if the keshig titles (qorchi, ba'atar, turhagut) actually referred to ranks and positions, or were granted to please a suboridnate and keep him feeling important.
As well, I have not read about Temur ever using Tamma units. He often used local powers raised for his armies, and they probably made up most garrisons as he required them. But he never, to my knowledge, employed the sort of strategy which tamma units entail. alqinchi were used, as that is one of those staple components of the inner Asian nomad army.
Neither have I read about him really utilizing specific Iranian units. He certainly employed their armourers and weapon makers, and relied on them as his infantry, foot archers etc. But the largest and most important arm of his force seems, from all the primary sources I've read, was nomadic cavalry, mainly horse archers. Some descriptions of the Timurid army in early 15th century are very reminiscent of 13th century descriptions of the Mongols. It's to the point that some sources simply call Temur's forces "the Chagatais."
Most of Temur's campaigns were very long distance- it was not unusual for him to march all the way across Iran in a single season. It seems what he would generally do, is march from Samarkand with his main body of Chagatai horsemen, with whom he'd march the greatest length of the journey (for reasons of speed, forage etc.). As he neared the target of the campaign, he would then raise local forces- either allied troops, or forced conscriptions, to serve him in other roles.
@@TheJackmeisterMongolHistory Thank you for the detailed answer!
Great Video man can you please make a video on how people who lived centuries after the death of Chinggis Khan were influenced by him like Babur of the Mughals and Adolf Hitler of the Nazis
Hitler? Really?
Playing my timurid campaign in eu4 just in time great video
You're underrated.
Thanks
Were Timur's soldiers mainly Mongols or Turko Iranics?
@Baghatur Tarkhan en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turco-Persian_tradition
Army were mostly Turks not Mongol or Persian
@@papazataklaattiranimam wrong
@@papazataklaattiranimam army were mostly mongols
The bigest conqurer
if he had conquered China he probably would've been the greatest.
What a legend!
Why are you talk like that lol
The pronunciations were cringe Jengis Khan facepalm and he never missed a phlegm on the Persian names
Chinggis khan*
@@Orgil. I think it gross that English people arnt allowed to anglicise names anymore it feels rasist
@@jamesnewstead7099 first of all Chinggis is title not name.
@@jamesnewstead7099 It's not racist to call something by its original name
@@Orgil. don't care its a title that is bestowed on one man who is known in Europe as gengis Khan and I don't care if that's not how it's pronounced
0:42 Kenchis khan? That’s new, 😂