What Made Genghis Khan The Greatest Conqueror Ever? |

What Made Genghis Khan The Greatest Conqueror Ever?
Watch Full Episode: • #AskAbhijit 3: Genghis...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUPPORT THE CHANNEL
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
►UPI (G-Pay/PhonePe/Paytm): abhijitchavda@icici
►PayPal: paypal.me/AbhijitChavda
►Become A Member on KZbin: / @abhijitchavda
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
JOIN #AbhijitChavda
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
★Twitter: / abhijitchavda
★Instagram: / theabhijitchavda
★Facebook: / theabhijitchavda
★Website:
★Email Inquiries: [e-mail]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
#AbhijitChavdaPodcast
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
★Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/1WmKYRI...
★Apple Podcasts: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
★Google Podcasts: podcasts.google.com/feed/aHR0...
★Stitcher: www.stitcher.com/show/the-abh...
★Amazon Music: music.amazon.in/podcasts/c879...
★Soundcloud: / abhijitchavda
★Audible: www.audible.com/pd/item_name-...
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
#AskAbhijitChavda #Abhijit #Chavda #AskAbhijitShow
Thank you for watching!
Please share the video and spread the message. 🙏

[@sukh-erdenemandakh9510]

Hello I want to say thank you As a Mongolian Genghis Khan is truly our pride I love that title that he is the greatest conqueror in history For a distance our histpry teachers said every soldier had a multiple horse like at least 2 horse in order to go fast Its like If 1 is tired u can ride other one

[@AbhijitChavda]

Thank you. Greetings and best wishes from India.

[@worsethanjoerogan8061]

Yeah two horses per warrior would be the absolute minimum. That was another reason their enemies would often overestimate their numbers. If you went by the size of the tracks their horses made it would look like they had far more men than they did. Also their mobility reinforced this perception because they would strike in so many places at once that Europeans couldn't imagine that it was the same force hitting two places.

[@shahanshahpolonium]

@Ajit Desai wheres the proof?

[@atriacharya2967]

@Ajit Desai So did Ashoka, though less.

[@IwinMahWay]

@Ajit Desai They deserved it.

[@sonamtshering194]

The video also hints that the Mongols lost power since they forgot about their roots.

[@jishnum851]

*Whenever you forgot about your roots you start to lose yourself*

[@jishnum851]

Today we are somewhat colonial to west

[@aiurea1]

@@jishnum851 why do you think that?

[@Articulatekarein]

@@jishnum851 bro let's First get our people food and better our economy And then talk about all of this shit Roots Culture And Shit Becoz never Economy is the only thing that helps

[@rightturn9604]

@@Articulatekarein Why don't you grow food and eat and sell and donate to the needy? Leave these culture, roots and shit to us. We'll take care of that.

[@Four_Words_And_Much_More]

Several things. 1. He was never deceived by wealth. He never desired wealth. 2. He was focused with a simple obsession that was just. 3. His focus was laser like. He only wanted justice for his people. The Mongols. 4. He spurned all the traditional trappings of power. He never had a throne. 5. He spurned destruction as a means to power. He was just to those he conquered as well as to those who followed him. Examples: He saved all the intelligent and educated who would promise fealty to him. Ditto craftsmen and beautiful women. Even in his death, the disposal of his body followed the way he lived his life. No wealth was placed in his tomb. If you could call it that. Some say those who buried him were all killed. But if the method that was proposed by the professor Abhijt Chavda was used, there is no need for that. The was no body left to be worshiped. There was no wealth to be hidden. The entire process caused the great Khan to simply fully and completely disappear. That was the way he lived his life. 'thus to suggest that he was buried as he lived is the most likely suggestion by far. What is greatness? It is to do good with the gifts you have. The gifts you were born with and have acquired on the journey of life. The best greatness of all is to teach and show by example: What is true love? That is my goal. I wish to become the person that can teach those ideas. The ideas I have discovered myself. for me, that is greatness. It requires the great focus found in the Great Khans life. Thank you for bringing these ideas to me.

[@yaqubebased1961]

How was massacring entire populations just?

[@gkmr1544]

He has a disciplined army and man of words and rules....even being a nomad...thats why they were successful....they were like huge moving war machine...

[@rjari8578]

Thanks for recognizing the Manipuri Pony

[@worsethanjoerogan8061]

We should also take note of how Mongol armies didn't really require supply lines to the same degree as a sedentary army did. Their decimal groups like minghaans and jaguns could operate independently, feeding themselves on wild game and whatever else was available. As gross as it sounds, in desperate situations they sometimes mixed mare's milk with blood from horses and drank that. This mobility also meant it was hard for Chinese or European armies to force them into pitched battles on unfavorable terms.

[@adityasaigal8080]

Genghis khan was named by western and chinese historians. His real name was Changez/genghis haan....he was a Buddhist, not a muslim. Some idiots consider him as muslim ruler. He is been said ruthless and merciless, but basically western historians hate to see that somebody from east conquered area more than any of the western and white king has ever conquered

[@ss2616]

All other points are correct, but he was a shamanic, not Buddhist. Though on religious aspect, he appreciated all religions.

[@adityasaigal8080]

@@ss2616 Thanks SS for the info

[@cognito8325]

Well he was ruthless and relatively merciless. It's not even a debate. Western historians weren't the only historians who called him that. Mongols themselves prided their king as that. "Basically, western hate to see somebody from the east conquered more land then them" that's just opinion. Napoleon, Vlad(the impaler) don't have great reputations either. There's a reason for that. Genghis and his heirs completely destroyed historic cities like Baghdad to ruins and thousands of historic and scientific books were destroyed never to be recovered again.

[@adityasaigal8080]

@@cognito8325 and do you know why they were destroyed??? Abhijit chivada only told about this. He wanted a route for trade, sent trade offers and delegation to the ruler of country where these cities lied. What did they do?? They murdered the entire delegation ruthlessly. So, there was no option. A real king is ruthless, merciless when it comes to deliver justice. So, this was the reason, those cities were completely destroyed, as a punishment. And those people deserved it completely, as they also did the same wherever they went. Destroying the entire civilization and then rule the ruins

[@Rishi123456789]

Genghis Khan was NOT a Muslim, nor was he was a Buddhist. Genghis Khan was a Tengrist.

[@satyanisth3501]

Well explained

[@rajibdeka2207]

Time magazine called him "greatest of 1000 years", beating Einstein and Newton.

[@grvsays]

Should I be proud on sharing birthday with Ghenghiz Khan, given the astrological aspect of it ?

[@neetuhareet9431]

Yes

[@rishivjoshi3225]

😂😂😂

[@ashketchum5466]

Nothing just 1/365.5 chance

[@rjari8578]

@@ashketchum5466 365.25 *

[@raghavannaidu6931]

No man that's not how astrology works

[@naveendhanwar7821]

आपके पास इन विषयों पर पर्याप्त ज्ञान है, आपको इन विषयों पर पुस्तकों की रचना भी करनी चाहिए। अगर यह भविष्य में संभव हुआ तो मुझे प्रतीक्षा करने में प्रसन्नता होगी। 🙏🙏🙏

[@sam.carpenter]

|| Jai Sri Ram || 🚩🛕 Here's a poem written by an innocent 😇 Kafir tribute to the great Genghis Khan - tiger of Mongolia In history's tapestry, a legend takes form, Genghis Khan, who stood strong in the storm. He never struck first, but when provoked, Terror reigned upon those who falsely cloaked. An ideal for the innocent Kafir, his norm. When faced with aggression, he unleashed his might, The Moghul terrorists trembled in fright. Their reign of terror, he sought to quell, Showing true strength, as legends will tell. Genghis Khan's justice, a beacon of light. If his tribe had thrived, enduring through years, Facing Taimur and Ghaznavi with no fears, Sanathanstan's wings, once golden and proud, Would not have faltered, lost in the shroud. Genghis Khan's legacy, a tale that endears.

[@suseelmarahattha5894]

Yup wanted short clips of your Q & A. Thank you.

[@Preetam1282]

Subtitles...finally!! Thank you for your efforts!!

[@allshades7991]

Mongols won due to their effective use of bow and arrow.They were perfect in it.

[@ALC0A021]

So much informative. Yes Mongols conquered most difficult terrains of this world.

[@PundrikUpadhyay]

Sir please keep live long sessions, it's worth watching. ❤️🙏

[@FactGenix]

#AskAbhijit Tell something about Battle of Hydaspes and it's conspiracy that who won the battle - Alexander or Porus?

[@krishan6331]

Thank you🙏

[@soumyadiptamajumder8795]

Requesting you to make videos on the following topics: 1. Hunnic Empire under Attila the Hun 2. The Gokturks

[@naman6491]

Sir thank You. You really changed my perspective towards Ghenghis Khan. Can please tell a query that why we thinks that Greeks under Alexander never saw Elephants even Macedonians used Caltrops to counter Persian Elephants. I saw this in Ancient top 10

[@soumyadiptamajumder8795]

Chinese siege machines were some of the best tech during that era!!!

[@lmmc7708]

Why Gengis khan never invaded india please Dub this episode in Hindi

[@YinYangPanda]

Most westerners will never understand Genghis Khan and the Mongols beyond their bias. I appreciate your perspective which isn’t filled with the common contradictions found when westerners approach this topic.

[@nilotpalsarmahsarma8344]

History ke bata aapse jankar khushi hui

[@sehajpasricha7231]

#AskAbijit what do you think about Graham Hancock's theory of a lost civilization?

[@abhiroopkumar1064]

#AskAbhijit In Cambodia in the so called Buddhist temples , there are many evidences found that many carvings of Hindu gods had been intentionally removed. Now my question is that they say that Buddhists are very good people so why would they do that ? I don't understand?

[@Chahaman_Harshit_00]

It was Jebe and Subutai.

[@kunalkhatana8448]

hello sir love your channel

[@vikramrazdan5680]

The inhospitable terrain from Persia to China favoured the Mongols under Chengiz Khan, because they could launch attacks in winters when the enemy was at its weakest.

[@pranaypatil1969]

Also sir when I googled a bit about yassa codes ..on point 32 it says ''At the beginning of each year, all of the people must present their daughters to the Khan so that he may choose some of them for himself and his children. [al-Makrizi]''..what are your views about it?

[@nirabhra-neel9863]

Please read this excerpt from a research paper put forward by Harvard Yenching Institute "Makrizi was more ambitious and attempted to present a full out- line of the Yasa. He had no manuscript of it at hand, but relied upon the information supplied to him by a certain Abu-Hashim, who told him that he had been able to see a copy of the Yasa in the library of the Monstanser College at Bagdad. Under these circumstances we cannot expected to find in Makrizi's book authentic quotations from the Yasa. In spite of Makrizi's intention to give the reader a full record of the contents of the Yasa, it is obvious that he quotes only a fragment of it. Most of the opinions of the Yasa he cites refer to criminal law. Either the copy of the Yasa which Abu Hashim perused was but a fragment in itself or he paid attention to only one section of the Yasa, although he assured Makrizi that this was the Yasa in full" Do not trust Makirizi's theories! He is a liar.

[@jahnabibhagawati24]

#AskAbhijit Are the Tie- Ahoms connected to mongols?

[@mohitsurkar6700]

❤

[@neoneoneoOne]

Therefore the nomads are persecuted in , like Gypsies? Don't mind Mrs&Mr Nomads....

[@PalashMitraTheJokerof13th]

Hello Mr Abhijit Chavda-Could you please recommend a book on Mr Genghis Khan Please.

[@Paresh-ew5so]

Even bhimthadi pony from Deccan plateau played bigger role in chatrapati shivaji Maharaj early era

[@abhishekmishra8236]

🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@jungemanner4915]

Genghis khan had 2 times lost single battle. First is against Jamukha 1190 and second is against Wan-Khan 1203. After lose Wan khan he hadnt enough Jurte, then slept outside and he had only 4600 troops, drunk dirty water direct rivers. That time was maybe most diffcult time for him.

[@ashraykumarmishra]

🙏

[@rdr0729]

Sir what was the communication technique used by Mongols?? I am reallllyyyyy curious because information is a weapon by itself

[@PimsleurTurkishLessons]

Find video titled with. How Genghis Khan Supplied his Army - Mongol Logistics Documentary .watch it from its 16.30 minute. He mentions about Yam system for post.

[@piyushpujari5763]

#AskAbhijit Sir people says that Genghis Khan also conqure by doing this that he forced his daughters to marry the Nation's king to which he want to conquer because after the death of the king his daughter will be the queen and it will came under his kingdom and if the king had already a wife, he killed her Is it true??

[@manishprajapati8544]

Wanna listen about India history

[@Maral31]

Good structures, strategies, very tolerant people, warriors 🩸, of course Mongol horses like a modern airplane. In my opinion that was a secret.

[@t3ngrist620]

agree with you. but chinese never really attacked nomads, instead they used pay the strongest clan and support them to not let others get stronger or unify (kind of bribe) at the times of genghis khan that tatar tribe were south-eastern and had the highest population compared to others. thus for trying to unify nomads Genghis's dad and his grandfathers were poisoned or taken to the chinese by tatar men.

[@bashkimgjikokaj275]

Alexander the Greate only 10 jiere Gengis Khan 30 jers.

[@gauravsood3486]

So why is Mongolia so backward today if they had such great leaders

[@MichailHordens]

The true appearance of Chinghiz Khan, the real History of Tatars, many of Turkic peoples and Russians: Perhaps you know that recently were published books about the unwritten (hidden) real history of the Tatars by independent Tatar historian Gali Yenikey. His books present a new, or rather ‘well-forgotted old’ information about the real history of the Tatars and other Turkic peoples. It must be said, that in official history there are many falsifications and slanders about the ‘Tatars - wild nomads’ etc., which were written by pro-Chinese, Persian, also both Romanovs tsars and Bolshevik ideologists. However primarily we should know the truth about the meaning of the names ‘Mongol’ and ‘Tatar’ (‘Tartar’) in the medieval Eurasia: According to many medieval sources, the name ‘Mongol’ until the 17th-18th centuries meant belonging to a political community, and was not the ethnic name. While ‘‘the name ‘Tatar’ was ‘the name of the own ethnos (nation) of Chinghiz Khan'. Also ‘…Chinghiz Khan and his people did not speak the language, which we now call the ‘Mongolian’…’’ (an academician-orientalist V.P.Vasiliev, 19th century). This confirmed by many little known data. So in fact Chinghiz Khan was from among the medieval Tatars and the outstanding and progressive leader of the Turkic peoples. It is worth saying that according to many little-known data, the ancient and medieval Tatars were a very developed people both in spiritual and material aspects. It was the medieval Tatars who created the first Constitution of Eurasia, which was called in Tatar ‘Great Yasu’ (‘Yasu’ in Tatar means 'Scripture'). But with time many of their descendants became spiritually disabled and forgot invaluable doctrine and covenants of the creators of Great Yasu... So that the Tatars of Chinghiz Khan - medieval Tatars - were one of the Turkic nations, whose descendants now live in many of the fraternal Turkic peoples of Eurasia - among the Tatars, Kazakhs, Bashkirs, Uighurs, and many others. And few people know that the ethnos of medieval Tatars, which stopped the expansion of the Persians and the Chinese to the West of the World in Medieval centuries, is still alive. Despite to the politicians of the tsars Romanovs tsars and Bolsheviks dictators, which had divided and scattered this ethnos to different nations... About everything above mentioned and a lot of the true history of the Tatars and other fraternal Turkic peoples, which was hidden from us, had been written, in detail and proved, in the book ‘Forgotten Heritage of Tatars’ - it is one of the dooks by Gali Yenikey, translated in Engilsh. There are a lot of previously little-known historical facts, as well as 16 maps and illustrations in this book. This e-book (in English language) you can easily find in the Internet here: www.kobo.com/ebook/forgotten-heritage-of-tatars-1 or here: payhip.com/b/Xujb On the cover of this book you can see the true appearance of Chinghiz Khan. It is his lifetime portrait. In the ancient Tatar historical source ‘About the clan of Chinghiz Khan’ its author gave the words of the mother of Chinghiz Khan: ‘My son Chinghiz looks like this: he has a golden bushy beard, he wears a white fur coat and rides on a white horse’. As we can see, the portrait of an unknown medieval artist in many ways corresponds to the words of the mother of the Hero, which have come down to us in this ancient Tatar epic. Therefore, this portrait, which corresponds to the information of the Tatar source and to data from other sources, we believe, the most reliably transmits the appearance of Chinghiz Khan...’. And here's another interesting thing: We can't keep silent that some 'very important' official historians try to retell the content (or rather, the concept) of the works of the independent historian Gali Yenikey (Yenikeiev). But they conceal where the information was by them taken from. However it turned out they were unsuccessful and confused - this official historians, apparently, do not dare to show the real history of the Tatars, being afraid of their ‘scientific chiefs’. But not only this - see the portrait of Chingiz Khan - see on the 7th minute of the video of the Institute of history of the Academy of Sciences of Tatarstan (Russia): kzbin.info/www/bejne/aYjUc2pnnNhomMU - also this portrait is shown there both before and after. This portrait is reconstruction, which made by Yenikeiev on the basis of a lifetime portrait of Chingiz Khan and of information from the medieval Tatar Dastan (epic) 'About the Origin of Ciingiz Khan', as well as from other historical sources. This portrait was used by authors of the video without Yenikeiev's permission and without telling where the portrait came from. This portrait is published on the cover of G. R. Yenikeiev's book ‘Forgotten heritage of the Tatars’: see: payhip.com/b/Xujb For the first time this portrait was published on the cover of the third book by G. R. Yenikeiev ‘In the footsteps of the black legend’ (published in 2009), see its electronic version: payhip.com/b/DNdC This ‘creativity’ of the official historians is called among the decent people as plagiarism - that is, as theft.

[@VenomMolotov]

Mongol are loosing there tengri ethnicity

[@Drunkush]

Why do Indian historians say that Alauddin Khilji repealed five to six attacks from the Mongols. What is the historic basis for this?

[@temujin2987]

Sir ,I think you like mongols from heart Are u pro mongols?

[@ss2616]

I just opened the video to see whether he tells the main and biggest reason. He missed the main point. All other reasons are fine but the main reason is - they were completely brutal and barbaric to the conquered enemies who ever posed any resistance, to the extent of being inhuman. This terrorised opponents, and several kingdoms surrendered just on the sight of mongols on their borders. He declared himself wrath of God for his enemy's sins. Similar brutal and inhuman tactics is used by Taliban and ISIS now. Second reason is, while other kingdoms followed their rows, columns, self established rules of their culture on the battlefield, mongols didn't followed any such things. They used to flee if battle was not turning in their favor, and then suddenly turn back and attack once again, when enemy was unprepared. They devastated the conquered area in such a way that no people, no building, no crop, no vegetation, nothing that is living survived there. Of course Mongols today would consider him a hero, but ask the descendants of few who survived or people who unchallengenly surrendered, they will tell you that Chenghez Khan was nothing but a monster, a demon.

[@rjari8578]

Thats a description of the west on Khan Heard that before

[@ss2616]

@@rjari8578 Yeah. And that is right.

[@nirabhra-neel9863]

@@ss2616 lol nothing that the west has written about certain other cultures is true. It's all written to propagate whatever they wanna believe. They are just pathetic human beings who no longer have control over the narrative of history.

[@bakchodbabajijoletajaancho2538]

His barbarity