Discussion in 'EtcetEra' started by g23, Oct 24, 2018.
The Mongols may have been bloodthirsty and ruthless in conquest but so did most empires preceeding and following it as I mentioned earlier. What I don't get is the complete villification of them from a standpoint of history.
The Mongol empire was one of the most religiously tolerant empires at the time. They would generally also let the institutions that were already in place before them continue to govern after conquest as long as they paid taxes.
Another thing that also is understated is that they brought security and safety to merchant routes across the empire which encouraged sharing of technology and trade along the Silk road.
Actually just started reading Genghos Khan and the Making of the Modern World.
My boy Genghis is crazy.
Fascinating how people admire these monsters and vilify more recent Empires and colonial powers. Is all that's required to admire mass butchers and genocidal maniacs a gulf of time between then and now?
And yet they were repelled 3 times by tiny Vietnam, how about that huh.
(that was the only history fact regarding them i remember from my days in school)
I also find it fascinating the Western view into the Mongols tends to be heavily through Marco Polo, and there is a big question mark as to whether he even ever made it to their region, how much interaction he had with them, etc. I remember one podcast said that its weird he never mentions the Great Wall or chopsticks and that there are no accounts of Marco Polo in Chinese records, which is weird.
Definitely a very interesting period of history, and for all that we decry modern times as "the worst" and such, its really nothing compared to how brutal things could be during the Mongol or Mayan periods if you weren't aligned right.
The number of stories of how his armies completely massacred cities when they displeased him is crazy, he erased a few from history itself to show his displeasure.
I was really bummed to hear Netflix cancelled Marco Polo after 2 seasons, while it had its faults it was still a fascinating show with a lens on something we don't see much on TV.
Something about history doesn't repeat but it often rhymes.
The biggest reason the Mongolian Empire isn't remembered in the same way Rome or Persia is likely comes down to the length of time it spent at its peak which was <100 years.
The Mongols were great at taking over places but without a firm leader the lands they conquered didn't really have the infrastructure to last (it didn't help that they killed off much of the native population in the places they invaded).
And yeah, I ain't gonna sit here and whitewash the atrocities of other empires but the Mongol invasions were unfortunately impressively horrific. Estimates range but the Mongolian Empire likely killed around 50 million people. The only war that had more casualties was WWII around 800 years later. They pretty much decimated entire populations.
They didn't really provide much to the advancement of humanity, did they?
Do you guys think a few hundred years from now people will the Nazis like we see the mongol empire? Or are the photos and video evidence of the atrocities going to prevent that from happening?
Yeah, its hard to tell how many they killed exactly (for obvious reasons), but it was a very large number of people. They basically slaughtered anyone who wouldn't be immediately useful to them, and the result of the war on the food and infrastructure killed off a large proportion of the rest.
That said, the Khwarazmians did totally start shit.
It's kind of cool to read about how they fucked up just about everyone's armies just by (literally) riding circles around them.
That's where it stops for me though dawg.
OP you can like history without giving 'props' to particularly brutal warlords, just like I'll always hold nothing but disgust for Nazi Germany and the Spanish conquistadors. History isn't a game of Civilization where more land = more props, get off my clay, let's celebrate murderers just because they won. There's more to history then gawking at world maps, and giving people in the ancient past credit for the formation of the modern world is ridiculous, their actions had no such goal and you could make the same argument for just about any random ass person if you go far back enough, down to the nameless peasants who first famed crops. And that's completely ignoring the implication that we should be grateful for how history turned out; must be nice to be white and have 'won' history. And/or must also be nice to have lived somewhere where you can celebrate Genghis Khan's accomplishments instead of hold the near universal loathing his name inspires anywhere that had to suffer his depravities. It's amazing how you can gloss over multiple genocides, the decimation of the Levant and Persia's most prosperous settlements which still affect the region to this day, the literal annihilation of Khwarazm to the point where the land became a wasteland instead of a breadbasket, the list goes on and on. Tl;dr the fuck is wrong with you
In the other hand, even on this day you see people saying that nazis did a lot of good things to germany and that the wermacht was actually a clean military unit that was just doing their job and that had zero responsability for nazi crimes, so the whitewashing of nazis is already happening, as good as it was for the allies to take enough pictures of the holocaust so no one who wanted could deny it, they did an horrible job selling the myth of the clean wermacht
They were definitely great at killing people. The real life Dothraki.
The Mughals that invaded India were a result of the Mongols.
So Op wants me to appreciate tyranny, torture, ethnic cleansing, and genocide.
But since they didn’t invade Europe it’s all good to appreciate them.
A historian is someone who tries to piece together the truth of what happened from these disparate accounts. In order to do that though, a good historian needs to both be objective and willing to look at history from a variety of angles. For example, it is okay to say both that the Mongols were wildly successful conquerors who laid the groundwork for future states, and that the Mongols butchered a shocking number of people and devestated entire countries to a horrific degree.
They put back civilizations hundreds of years.
On the other hand, brought together different religions.
Was it worth it, probably not.
Wtf is people's obsession with appreciating oppressive genocidal regimes. Another 50 years we'll get Third Reich appreciation Pol Pot appreciation threads.
Changed the thread title to be less...weird.
I find the Mongolian Empire to be incredibly fascinating. The pretty crazy religious tolerance for the time, that they were quite meritocratic, and so on.
The sheer scale of it is simply mind blowing too. There's a part in Dan Carlin's Wrath of the Khan's talking about one of the kurraltais and just the sheer varieties of people and vassal states that showed up there was crazy. Steppe Peoples, Chinese peoples, Europeans, Persians. Muslims, Christians, Daoists, Buddhists. Something about having so many disparate people under one banner stirs something in me. It's incredibly impressive.
I'm making my way through "Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World" and there's a great juxtaposition of how while Mongke Khan was hosting a religious debate between Muslims, Christians, and Buddhists, you had the King of France burning Jewish scriptures, kicking them out, and getting canonized for it.
They were obviously brutal as hell, but something about them is just awe inspiring to me.
Was there ever an empire, really?
They basically did a coup in china, but didn't really export their ways or customs anywhere.
The mongols raided nations, they didn't conquer them.
.. They technically conquered China, only to be absorbed culturally in two or three generations.
I wonder if we'd speaking Farsi right now if the Mongol Horde didn't happen.
was it really an empire or more like a plague that left various pockets of non unified half destroyed civilizations in its wake
it was certainly an impressive amount of conquest i guess, but to what end
We won't (or at least shouldn't) have that problem with people like Hitler or Pol Pot because that historical record is clear enough in recording their atrocities.
They didn’t do much besides kill people. Places like Rome have technological and cultural advancements though they shouldn’t be romanticized either. On the other hand Mongols could have been replaced by a tornado across Asia and history wouldn’t be that much different.
They were impressive conquerors and had some fascinating cultural quirks, but the Mongols only real contribution to history was the massive devastation they left in their wake. That is why they are probably less talked about than other empires. Well that and the fact that Western Europe was left untouched by them.