15. This Ruler’s Rashness Backfired Not Only Upon Himself, But Upon His Subjects as Well
Shah Muhammad II’s insult to Genghis Khan backfired not only on him, but on his subjects as well. It was during their invasion of the Khwarezmian Empire that the Mongols gained their infamous reputation for savagery. Millions died, as Genghis ordered the massacre of entire cities that offered the least resistance, and sent thousands of captives ahead of his armies as human shields. By the time Genghis was done, Khwarezm had been reduced from a prosperous empire to an impoverished and depopulated wasteland.
At the grand mosque in the once-thriving but now smoldering city of Bukhara, Genghis told the survivors that he was the Flail of God, and that: “If you had not committed great sins, God would not have sent a punishment like me upon you“. The fate of Shah Muhammad, who brought catastrophe upon himself by insulting somebody he assumed was just another upstart barbarian nomad chieftain from the Steppe, was tragic. Even more tragic was the fate visited upon his subjects because of their ruler’s decision to insult one of history’s scariest conquerors.
14. Susceptibility to Enemy Ruses Caused the Boers to Miss an Opportunity to Win an Easy Victory
During the Second Boer War (1899 – 1902), the deck was overwhelmingly stacked against the Boers, who had to contend with the might of the British Empire. However, the Boers got off to a surprisingly good start and beat the odds that had predicted their defeat in a short campaign. Instead, they turned back invading enemy columns with a series of early upset victories that embarrassed the British and put them on the back foot. Then, incredibly, the Boers went on the offensive.
The Boers’ good start would have been even more incredible if they had not let an opportunity for an easy victory slip their grasp. It happened at the South African town of Mafeking, which the Boers besieged. They greatly outnumbered the defenders, but were taken in by a series of ruses and ended up believing that the town’s garrison was far stronger than it actually was. The adversary who gulled them was Colonel (later Lord, and founder of the Boy Scouts) Robert Baden-Powell, commander of Mafeking’s British garrison.
13. This Commander Seized a Town by Resorting to Trickery
Colonel Robert Baden-Powell, commander of Mafeking’s besieged British garrison, had initially seized the town by bluff during the runup to the war. He held on to it with a steady diet of bluffs during the subsequent siege after hostilities commenced. Baden-Powell, who had been ordered to raise two regiments of volunteers, began storing his supplies in Mafeking. However, he was prevented from openly marching into and garrisoning the town before the war started because doing so was deemed impolitic and provocative.
So Baden-Powell politely asked the townspeople for permission to send guards to protect his supplies. They consented, and Baden-Powell sent in his entire force of nearly 1500 men. When the townspeople protested, he responded that he had never specified the size of the guard. When the war began soon thereafter, the British colonel found himself besieged by a Boer force five bigger than his own. Those were dire odds, so Baden-Powell turned to trickery. The Boers’ failure to immediately attack and seize the town backfired by depriving them of an easy victory.
12. Having Seized Mafeking by Trick, Robert Baden-Powell Used More Trickery to Keep It
To keep the Boers wary of attacking Mafeking, Robert Baden-Powell began burying mysterious boxes around the town’s periphery. When asked, he responded that they were powerful new landmines, the latest in British technology. To demonstrate, he had a couple blown up within sight of Boer sympathizers, whom he then allowed to slip out of town to inform the enemy. In reality, the boxes blown up were stuffed with the town’s entire dynamite stores, while the other boxes buried around the defensive perimeter contained nothing but sand.
Another of Baden-Powell’s tricks revolved around barbed wire, of which Mafeking’s defenders had none. Barbed wire was known to be effective in slowing down a charge, and its presence in front of a defensive position was enough to give attackers pause. Mafeking’s British commander wanted to discourage the numerically superior Boers from charging and overrunning his defenses – something they could have easily done had they made a determined attempt. So he set out to convince them that he had plenty of barbed wire.
11. Ruses Kept the Boers From Capturing a Town That Had Been in Their Grasp
Colonel Robert Baden-Powell did not have any barbed wire at Mafeking. What he did have were plenty of wooden posts such as those from which barbed wire was strung. So he directed that the posts be hammered into the ground all around the defensive perimeter. From a distance, even with binoculars, barbed wire is difficult to see. However, the wooden posts from which barbed wire is usually strung are readily visible, and the sight of a line of such posts in the distance is indicative of barbed wire fences.
To further mislead Boer watchers, Baden-Powell had his men drop to the ground whenever they reached a line of wooden posts. They were instructed to then crawl “beneath” the imaginary barbed wire to reach the other side, before getting back on their feet, dusting themselves off, and carrying on. Such ruses, coupled with stubborn and bloody resistance when the situation warranted, worked. Baden-Powell fought off the enemy and withstood the Boer siege for 217 days. He held on to Mafeking until he was finally relieved by the arrival of a British army that chased off the Boers.
During World War I the French Army introduced an innovative new light machinegun, the Chauchat, but the new weapon backfired. The Chauchat gained infamy as one of the worst firearms to have ever gone into mass production and been inflicted upon an army as a standard-issue weapon. Introduced in 1915, it immediately began presenting problems stemming from both a defective design and poor workmanship. The defects were worsened by reliance on poor and low-quality metals during production.
On the positive side, the Chauchat was revolutionary. It was the world’s first truly light (20 lbs) portable automatic firearm, that did not require a team of machine gunners and a heavy mount or tripod. It was light enough to be carried around the battlefield by a single soldier. It could be fired from the hip during assaults in suppressive marching or walking fire to pin down enemy defenders while the attackers closed in. It was also inexpensive and featured a detachable magazine and a selective fire capability. From that perspective, the Chauchat set the template for subsequent light machine guns, from the BAR to the SAW.
WWI’s battlefield conditions exposed serious defects in the Chauchat. Among sundry problems, the worst was the detachable magazine, which was designed with one side open. That backfired by allowing the entry of loose earth, mud, dirt, and grit with which WWI’s trenches abounded. The particles made their way into the chamber, barrel, and firing mechanism, resulting in stoppages and malfunctions. The magazines were flimsy and easily dented, resulting in jamming and stoppage. The ejection port lacked a cover, which allowed dirt and other particles to enter from there as well and cause malfunctions.
When the Chauchat did not cease firing because it was jammed with dirt and mud, or because the magazine got dented, it ceased firing from overheating. The sights were misaligned, which wreaked havoc with aiming. The plate assemblies were secured by screws that often came loose and fell off when the weapon was fired. Moreover, the bipod was loose. That, coupled with poor ergonomics, made it impossible to keep the weapon on target other than with short bursts. By 1918, only three years after its introduction and with months still to go before the war ended, the Chauchat was gradually withdrawn from service, to be replaced by the M1918 Browning Automatic Rifle (BAR).
8. Overconfidence Backfired Upon Islam’s Last Caliph
Arrogance and overconfidence are bad traits. They are even worse when deployed by somebody in a weak position against an opponent who is overwhelmingly stronger. That was a lesson learned – too late – by Al Musta’sim Billah (1213 -1258), the last ruler of the Abbasid Caliphate, and Islam’s last Caliph. Towards the end of his reign – and as it turned out, the end of his dynasty – Al Musta’sim decided to engage in a medieval version of a flame with the Mongols, led by Hulagu, one of history’s most terrifying generals.
It backfired badly upon Al Musta’sim, a weak ruler ruling a weak rump of what had once been a mighty empire. Worse, it backfired upon his subjects, who paid dearly for their ruler’s failure to accurately assess the situation and act accordingly. The last Caliph had the misfortune to be surrounded by ineffectual advisors, who offered him conflicting advice when the Mongols demanded his submission. He rejected some demands, ignored others, and answered others with bluster and empty threats. However, he failed to prepare adequate defenses against what was sure to follow.
7. The Mongols Turn Their Attentions to the Abbasid Caliphate
The Mongols first erupted into the Islamic world in the 1220s. As seen above, that was when Genghis Khan destroyed the Khwarezmian Empire and conquered as far west as western Persia up to the edges of Mesopotamia. That outburst was followed by a decades-long lull, as far as the Middle East and the Islamic world were concerned. In the meantime, the Mongols directed their energies elsewhere, against China, Kievan Rus, Eastern Europe, and in internal squabbles amongst themselves. The lull ended in the 1250s, when a new Mongol ruler, Genghis’ grandson Mongke, turned his attention to the Middle East and sent his brother, Hulagu, to assert Mongol power over the region.
Hulagu began his campaign of conquest by first destroying the Assassins. A murderous cult led by a shadowy mystic known as The Old Man of the Mountain, the Assassins operated from a string of mountain holdfasts and had terrorized the Middle East for over a century and a half. Hulagu completed their suppression by 1256, then turned his attention to the Abbasid Caliphate, based in Baghdad. He ordered its Caliph, Al Musta’sim, to submit to Mongol suzerainty and pay tribute.
6. Defiance Coupled With Weakness Turned Out to be a Deadly Mix
The Abbasids had once been a powerful dynasty that ruled the world’s strongest, wealthiest and largest empire. In Al Musta’sim’s era, however, they were centuries removed from their heyday. By the 1250s, the Abbasid Caliphate’s writ did not go far beyond Baghdad. As to the Caliph, he had been reduced to a ceremonial figurehead, a puppet of Turkish or Persian sultans wielding real power and acting in his name. What the Caliph still had was some spiritual and moral authority, and enough pride to refuse Hulagu’s summons to submit. However, he was not prepared to face the Mongols, who had conquered bigger and tougher opponents than the small rump that still remained to the Abbasids.
Al Musta’sim believed that the Mongols would not be able to seize Baghdad, and that if the city was endangered, the Islamic world would rush to its aid. That belief backfired upon the Caliph. Hulagu marched on Baghdad, the Islamic world did not rush to its aid, and after a twelve-day siege, the city fell. The Mongols sacked Baghdad, massacred its inhabitants, burned its vast libraries, and put the city to the torch. Al Musta’sim was captured, but the Mongols had a taboo against spilling royal blood. So they executed him by rolling him in a carpet, over which their army rode when it marched off to further conquests, their horses trampling the last Caliph to death.
5. An Ancient Athenian Scheme That Backfired Spectacularly
Few plans in history have backfired more spectacularly than that concocted to bring down controversial Ancient Athenian general and politician Alkibiades (450 – 404 BC). He was a relative of Pericles, Ancient Athens’ most prominent politician, and the one who took the city to the pinnacle of its Classical Era glory and prestige. However, Alkibiades did not share his famous kinsman’s probity or commitment to democracy. Instead, he was perhaps the most dynamic, adventurous, fascinating, and catastrophic Athenian leader of his era.
With Athens at the height of her power, Alkibiades’ rivals tried to take advantage of a murky scandal to prosecute him while most of his supporters were away at war. However, instead of obeying a summons to stand a trial, he was bound to lose, Alkibiades fled. He defected to Athens’ enemy, Sparta, and helped it turn the tide of war against his home city. What followed next was a decade of twists and turns, betrayals and counter-betrayals. As seen below, it all ended with a humiliating Athenian defeat, and a spectacular fall from which the city never recovered.
Alkibiades was born into a wealthy family. His father had made a name for himself during the Persian War – the one in the movie 300 and its less impressive sequel, 300: Rise of an Empire – both as a fighter and by subsidizing the cost of a trireme. The father was killed when Alkibiades was a toddler, and his relative Pericles became his guardian. However, Pericles was too busy with his duties as a statesman to provide the boy with the necessary guidance. Fortunately for Pericles, he did not live to see how the failure to properly raise his ward backfired so badly that it wrecked Athens.
Alkibiades developed into a dissipated young man, whose gifts of brilliance and charm were counterbalanced by self-centeredness, irresponsibility, extravagance, and debauchery. In his early years growing up, Alkibiades was considered Athens’ most beautiful youth. In an era when pederasty was widespread and acceptable, he was passionately pursued by many and was showered with gifts and flattery. Even Socrates was among his admirers. That kind of pursuit, admiration, and being the center of attention boosted Alkibiades’ ego through the stratosphere and solidified his sense of entitlement.
3. A Deft Political Maneuver to Isolate Alkibiades From His Supporters
When the Peloponnesian War (431 – 404 BC) between Athens and Sparta began, Alkibiades quickly gained a reputation for courage and military talent. That went hand in hand with his rise as a charismatic and persuasive speaker in the Athenian Assembly. A hawk, by 420 BC Alkibiades had become one of Athens’ generals, and he strongly opposed reconciliation with Sparta. In 415 BC, he convinced the Assembly to send a massive expedition to invade Sicily and conquer Syracuse. On the eve of sailing, however, statues of the god Hermes throughout Athens were desecrated. Suspicion immediately fell upon Alkibiades, whose dissolute clique had a reputation for impiety and drunken vandalism.
There was no concrete proof, however. Alkibiades demanded an immediate trial, but his enemies realized that he would be acquitted if a trial was held at the time. Instead, they allowed the expedition, whose ranks were disproportionately comprised of Alkibiades’ supporters, to sail, with the charges still hanging over him. Then, after the city had been largely emptied of his partisans, a ship was sent to Sicily, summoning Alkibiades to return to Athens and face trial before an Assembly in which his enemies were now a majority. It seemed like a deft political maneuver, but it backfired spectacularly.
2. The Plan to Isolate Alkibiades Backfired on Athens in a Major Way
Rather than obey the summons to face trial in Athens, Alkibiades fled, and defected to Sparta. He advised the Spartans to adopt a strategy that led to the near-complete annihilation of Athens’ Sicilian expedition – the force he had organized, convinced Athens to send to Sicily, and whose men he had once led. It was the most catastrophic defeat suffered by Athens during the war. Of the tens of thousands of Athenians who took part, only a relative handful ever saw Athens again. Those not killed in combat or massacred afterward were enslaved, and sent to Sicilian quarries were they were worked to death.
Alkibiades also convinced the Spartans to abandon their strategy of marching into Athens’ home region of Attica each campaigning season, burning in looting, then retreating and repeating the cycle the following year. Instead, he had the Spartans establish a permanent fortified base in Attica, which allowed them to exert direct pressure on Athens year-round. He also went to Ionia, where he stirred up a revolt against Athens by her allies and subject cities in Asia Minor. However, Alkibiades was notoriously unable to keep it in his pants, and it backfired on him when he was caught in bed with the wife of Sparta’s King Agis II.
1. After Betraying Everybody, Alkibiades Went Down, and Took Athens With Him
Fleeing from Sparta, Alkibiades made a beeline for the Persians. He convinced them to adopt a strategy to prolong the war as long as possible, to keep Athens and Sparta too busy fighting each other to challenge Persia’s interests. Back in Athens, which was reeling from the string of catastrophes that Alkibiades had helped inflict upon his city, political turmoil led to an oligarchic coup. However, the Athenian fleet remained pro-democracy. Alkibiades stepped into the chaos and used his charisma to persuade the fleet to take him back. From 411 to 408 BC, he led the Athenian fleet in a dramatic recovery, winning a series of stunning victories that turned the war around.
Suddenly, it was Sparta that was reeling and on the verge of collapse. Alkibiades returned to Athens in 407 BC, and received a rapturous welcome. His earlier treasons were forgiven and temporarily forgotten, and he was given supreme command in conducting the war. However, the Athenians turned on him a few months later, after a minor naval defeat when he was absent from the fleet. He fled again, and having burned bridges with all sides, holed up in a fortified castle in Thrace, before fleeing even further away to Phrygia. A Spartan delegation traveled to Phrygia, and convinced its Persian governor to have Alkibiades murdered in 404 BC. That same year Athens finally collapsed beneath the load of disasters heaped upon it by Alkibiades, and surrendered.
Where Did We Find This Stuff? Some Sources and Further Reading