Subject: alginci light cavalry of mangudai 'suicide troop' unit
Culture: Mongol
Setting: Mongol empire 12-13thc
Evolution:
Caveat
* Peers 2015 p40-41
"Men probably supplied most of their own equipment, and so the quality and quantity of weapons and armour might vary significantly within a unit. Modern writers often refer to Mongol 'light' and 'heavy' cavalry, implying the sort of distinction which existed between hussars and cuirassiers of nineteenth-century European armies, for instance. However, in the great majority of contemporary accounts there is no suggestion that the members of the 'minghans' or 'toumans' were differentiated in any way according to their equipment or their function on the battlefield. It is true that Carpini says that within each unit the best-armoured men were placed in the front rank, but that is no more than one would expect of any military formation, and it need not mean that their tactical roles was any different. A few units -- the guards, and the Uru'uts and Mangquts during the wars of unification, for example -- seem to have been regarded as especially effective, but the distinctions between the better armed and equipped aristocratic 'knights' and the lighter 'skirmishers' that we see in descriptions of the Khitan, Jurchen and other contemporary armies do not appear to have existed in the Mongol 'toumans'. Juvaini, emphasising the 'levée en masse' nature of the Mongol army, describes it as 'a peasantry in the dress of an army, of which, in time of need, all, from small to great, from those of high rank to those of low estate, are swordsmen, archers or spearmen'. But this writer is not very precise in his use of military terminology, and we cannot necessarily conclude from this one remark that the men with swords, bows and spears were not the same people. Nowhere else, in fact, is there any suggestion that there were Mongol soldiers who were not equipped with the bow, a weapon so characteristic of them that they were often referred to as 'the nation of the archers'."
Context (Event Photos, Primary Sources, Secondary Sources, Field Notes)
* May 2007 p36
"The tamma consisted of a main force, and an advance force known as the alginci (plural algincin). The algincin, consisting of a vanguard and scouts, were stationed closer to the cities, while the tamma remained in better pasturelands."
* Buell 2003 p104
"ALGINCI. Forward-based components of a tamma, or nomadic garrison force. Their purpose was providing warning in the event of a major attack."
* Nicolle/Hook 1990 p32
"Though Mongol tactics relied upon horse-archery and were fully within the ancient military traditions of the Eurasian steppes, there is no doubt that the Mongols used them to more devastating effect than any of their predecessors since Attila the Hun.
"The bulk of Mongol tribesmen could fight only as lightly armoured or even unarmoured horse-archers ...."
* Haskew/Jörgensen/McNab/Niderost/Rice 2008 p75-76
"The Mongol horse archer had several functions. He operated as scout, skirmisher, harasser and finally as mobile artillery. Each man carried two or three bows for both long- and short-range fire. He was also eqipped with three quivers, each with 30 arrows so that he would not run out of projectiles during battle. On the march both he and his heavy cavalry colleagues would have two or three horses so that they always had a rested mount available.
"[...] The mounted archer was never supposed to get entangled with the enemy at close quarters but instead keep him pinned down and harassed [sic] by a constant barrages [sic] of arrows."
* Carey/Allfree/Cairns 2006 p117
"If the enemy army was stationary, the Mongol general might command his main force to strike it in the rear, or turn its flank, or engage and then feign a retreat, only to pull the enemy into a pre-planned ambush using an elite light cavalry corps called the mangudai or 'suicide troops' (an honourable title more than a job description). The function of the mangudai was to charge the enemy position alone, and then break ranks and flee in the hope that the enemy would give chase. If the enemy pursued, the Mongols would lead them into terrain sustainable for ambush."
Costume
* Heath 1978 p104-105
"Mongol costume and equipment is [sic] described fairly thoroughly in contemporary sources. WIlliam of Rubreck records that in summer the Mongols wore silks, rich brocades and cottons from China and Persia, and Friar John de Plano Carpini probably intends the same materials when he speaks of buckram, 'purple' and baldequin. Marco Polo also speaks of cloth of gold (brocade) and silk, lined or decorated with sable, ermine, squirrel and fox fur. One type of Chinese shirt, first recorded in 1219, was of raw silk worn as a type of armour since arrows could not penetrate it, instead being driven into the skin so that by tugging on the shirt the arrowhead could be extracted from the wound cleanly.
"In winter fur coats and breeches were worn, usually 2 of the former, the inner coat with the fur on the inside and the outer with it outside. The outer coat was of wolf, fox, monkey, badger, dog or goat skin depending on the social status of the wearer. Sheepskin and stuffed silk were also worn, plus felt which served as a type of light armour.
"Carpini mentions white, red and blue-purple tunics as well as baldequin. H. H. Howorth, describing the dress of mid-19th century Mongols, says the usual colours for the outer summer coat (the Kalat) were blue or brown, over a bright blue or grey shirt; trouser colours appear to have been similar. The flap-opening of the Kalat went from left to right, as opposed to the right-over-left opening of the Turks. An ornamental belt, round fur or plush-trimmed cap and leather boots with felt soles completed the costume. Howorth adds that at that late date the cap had two 45 cm ribbons hanging down at the back, and these appear to be mentioned in at least one contemporary source of our period."
* Peers 2015 40
"The Mongol soldier was equipped in a simple but practical fashion for the harsh climate of his homeland, though there does not seem to have been anything that we could recognise as a uniform. According to John de Plano Carpini, he usually wore a long fur or sheepskin coat, a fur cap with earflaps, and felt boots. Chinese paintings show that in hot weather he might discard the coat and replace the cap with a sort of low turban. He was armed with a bow as well as a selection of weapons for hand-to-hand combat, and in battle he donned an iron helmet and -- if he could afford it -- a suit of iron or leather armour."
* Carey/Allfree/Cairns 2006 p116
"The Mongol light trooper usually did not wear hard body armour, though he did often wear a padded gambeson and employ a wicker shield covered in thick leather. In combat, he replaced his thick woollen cap with a simple hardened leather or iron helmet if available."
* Nicolle/Hook 1990 p34
"Almost all sources agree that the Mongol soldier wore a fur cap with earflaps, a fur-lined or felt coat, thick stockings and soft leather riding boots."
Archery
* Carey/Allfree/Cairns 2006 p116
"Mongol light cavalry were required to reconnoitre for the army, act as a screen for their heavier counterparts in battle, and provide missile fire support in attacks, and follow-up pursuit once a battle was won. These light horsemen were armed in characteristic Asiatic fashion with two composite bows (one for long distance and one for short), two quivers containing at least sixty arrows, two or three javelins and a lasso.
"The Mongol composite bow was larger than most of its central Asian cousins, with a hefty pull of up to 165 pounds and an effective range of 350 yards. Quivers carried arrows for many purposes: light arrows with small, sharp points or use at long ranges, heavier shafts with large, broad heads for use at close quarters, armour-piercing arrows, arrows equipped with whistling heads for signalling and incendiary arrows for setting things on fire. The Mongol warriors were so adept at mounted archery that they could bend and string the bow in the saddle and then loose the arrow in any direction at full gallop."
* Irving Arts Center > Genghis Khan: The Exhibit
"The Mongols' most effective weapons were their highly flexible recurved composite bows, which required as long as a year to construct by working wood, animal horn, and sinew. Mongol soldiers often slept with their prized bows to prevent them from stiffening in the cold. Pulled back with great strength, the Mongol bow could shoot an arrow 350 yards, twice as far as European bows of the time and 100 yards farther than huge English longbows.
"Mongols were such expert archers that they could launch arrows while facing backward or while hanging behind the sides of their horses for protection. They released their arrows when all four feet of their mounts were off the ground to keep their aim true. The Mongol arsenal included armor-piercing arrows, flaming arrows, and whistling arrows, shot overhead to terrify the enemy."
* Gorelik 1995 p33
"The warriors all used their powerful (more than 60 kg of tension force) bows to great effect. The arrowheads were of different size and shape."
* Lessem p24
"Mongolian cavalrymen carried a variety of arrows for long-range and closeup shooting. Mongolian bows were recurved and highly flexible, allowing them to launch arrows over 400 yards -- nearly twice as far as the European bows of the time. Each soldier carried two quivers of 20 or more arrows with heads of many shapes for different targets."
Saber
* Marshall 1993 p40
"Light cavalry carried a small sword and two or three javelins ...."
* Nicolle/Hook 1990 p35-36
"Swords were ... not always curved sabers, as is so often thought, though even straight swords would normally be single-edged."
* Heath 1978 p105
"Polo records basic Mongol equipment as bow, mace and sword (other sources describe the latter more accurately as a curved, one-edged sabre)."
* Peers 2015 p64-65
"Archaeological finds from Russia and Mongolia suggest that Mongol swords could be of a variety of types, some of them broad and straight like contemporary European blades, but by far the most common were slightly curved, single-edged sabres, with blades around a metre long. These were lighter than the swords typically used in medieval Europe, and as we might expect from the written sources they were optimised for cutting. On several occasions Genghis gives his followers instructions to slice through the necks or shoulders of his enemies, implying that swords were normally employed as cutting rather than stabbing weapons. The curvature of a sabre makes it more effective for this purpose than a straight sword, for two reasons. One is that a shorter section of the edge comes into contact with the target, so that the force of the blow is more concentrated. More importantly it facilitates a 'drawing cut', in which the swordsman draws his hand either backwards or forwards as the blade hits, slicing more deeply and inflicting more damage than can be achieved by a simple chopping motion. With a straight blade the initial blow and the subsequent cut require the sword arm to move in two different directions, while a curved weapon allows the whole sequence to be completed in one smooth movement. More of the blade can also be brought into play without having to extend the arm, simply by slicing backwards and downwards, which could have been an advantage in a tightly-packed melee .... A single-edged sword might seem to be less versatile than one sharpened on both sides, but it has the advantage that the back, being left unsharpened apart from a short section near the tip, can be wide enough to provide extra rigidity, and can also be used to parry an opponent's weapon without risking damage to the cutting edge. So while the Mongol sabre might have been less effective than the heavy, straight swords used by Europeans and Arabs at smashing though metal armour, it could probably have been wielded more dexterously in the press of a fight, and would have done more damage to less well-protected parts of an opponent's body. The very best sword blades were said to come from India and Syria, but although these could have been traded along the Silk Road, it is unlikely that any but the wealthiest Mongols would have been able to obtain them."
* Nicolle/Hook 1990 p35-36
"Swords were ... used reserved [SIC] for the élite. They were not always curved sabres, as is so often thought, though even straight swords would normally be single-edged. A decorated cap and sword belt were worn as insignia of rank or command."
* Withers 2010 p83 = Withers/Capwell 2010 p331
"When the Mongols invaded China in the early 13th century, they brought with them a curved, one-handed and single edged cavalry sabre that had been used by Turkic peoples (from Central Asia) since the 8th century. The curved design of the sabre influenced the shape of the Chinese dao, superseding the straight-bladed jian."
* Lessem 26
"The Mongolian sword was short and a distant second to the bow and arrow in the cavalryman's arsenal."
Crop
*
"
Bag
*
"
Bottle
*
