Not really, unlike the rest of IQfy I don’t think history of non-whites is white genocide which is why I enjoy Mongol history
I just don’t get my rocks off to “white people bad” history either
Chingis's virility is a meme. He only had eight sons. He was outdone by his own grandson Kublai who had eleven sons. The high number of descendants attributed to him is due to the success of his extended family rather than Chingis alone, which is pretty par for the course for any successful royal family.
Mongols were notoriously weak in terms of their constitution. Most of the Chingisid family croaked in their thirties and muh alcohol is a piss poor excuse mongol simps hide behind. It's one of the reasons for the decline of their empire.
*Raise his wife son that she had with your great great great great great great great great great grandfather*
According to modern genetics Jochi is highly likely to be Gengheis' son
Uh, so Temujin was right about letting him live.
the genetics of what? there are no verifiable members of his family, his tribe cant even be found.
He left no descendants, he didnt rape anyone.
Did they find Jochi's corpse or what? Do you have a source beyond your dream?
Proof ?
but I would also be the descendant of the rapist himself, so it kinda cancels out
This, I wish I had a chad mongol conqueror ancestor.
I don't know why contemporary liberals glorify the Mongols to such a degree given their bruality.
They do?
They don’t, in fact I find they mostly ignore them along with anything that can’t be distilled into it “white people bad”
You wanna be a victim so bad
Not really, unlike the rest of IQfy I don’t think history of non-whites is white genocide which is why I enjoy Mongol history
I just don’t get my rocks off to “white people bad” history either
where have you been the past few decades. People love sucking off the mongols
Who does?
do you not read?
Nebulous liberals? Give me some actual examples
George Lane is a big one among academics. Among pop historians jack weatherford is the one.
Also the current mindset in Academia for the past few decades as been "corrective" revisionism in relation to the Mongols
Eh?
they dont
why should people care about stuff that happened in the 1200s and barely touched anywhere relevant for Americans?
Because its interesting? Not everything has to be about Burgerland or Europe.
should history classes be about the interesting stuff or the relevant stuff?
Interesting
Very cool great great great great great great great great great grandfather
Hecking based boy.
Still making the zerglings seeth after centuries.
I'm proud to have the blood of such a High Value Alpha Male Chad running through me
Chingis's virility is a meme. He only had eight sons. He was outdone by his own grandson Kublai who had eleven sons. The high number of descendants attributed to him is due to the success of his extended family rather than Chingis alone, which is pretty par for the course for any successful royal family.
Mongols were notoriously weak in terms of their constitution. Most of the Chingisid family croaked in their thirties and muh alcohol is a piss poor excuse mongol simps hide behind. It's one of the reasons for the decline of their empire.
the brighter flame burns quicker
Based great great great great great great great great great grandfather
How did Zhangs fail to find Genghis and Gublai Khans corpses?