Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
The rise and fall of the Mongol Empire
Mongol empire research paper
What were some positive and negative effects the mongols had on europe
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: The rise and fall of the Mongol Empire
During the twelfth and thirteenth centuries there were a group of people called the Tartars. These people were members of the Mongolia and they called themselves Tata. “However, when people realized that this sounded a lot like Tartarus, Roman mythology’s variation of Hell, they started calling the Mongols Tartars – ‘people from Tartarus,’ meaning demons from hell” (Poisuo, 1). The Mongols were known for the violence and wanting to take over the world by attacking everyone. Therefore, people around the world started calling them “demons from hell.” Carpini who was one of the first Europeans to enter the Mongol Empire, wrote about his journey through the empire and everything that he learned about the Tartars, their religion, marriages, food, clothing, and many more, in his book “The Story of the Mongols Whom We Call the Tartars.” Carpini’s description of the Tartars throughout the book seems to be unpleasing to him and his values of life. Despite the fact that Carpini describes many different aspects of Mongol life in his book, in my judgment he is most interested in their family values and how different they are from the Western European family values that he has grown up into, Carpini was mostly blinded throughout the book by his previous judgment on Mongols, which could be trusted due to the fact that the Mongols really were violent. In comparison to post-Classical societies the Mongols fit in with some aspects such as how much power money can get for people, however, they differ in their beliefs such as family values. Throughout history we have seen that family values have been one of the most important aspects of societies around the world. Although these values may be different from one another, we can see that it is a ma... ... middle of paper ... ... Story of the Mongols Whom We Call the Tartars. In his book he explained everything he saw and learned about the Mongols, such as their marriages, religion, clothing, food, and even the way they fought in war. Throughout the book, it can be seen that in his mindset the societal value of the Mongols are not the same as his. Carpini describes many different aspects of Mongol life throughout his book, however, one of the most shocking and interesting aspects was their family values and how different those value are from the values of the Western European values. Carpini’s previous judgment about the Mongols was blinding him throughout this book and journey. When comparing the Mongols to the post-Classical societies, they have differences and similarities, they are similar in how they rank their people by money and power, but they are different in their family values.
Many people ask “How Barbaric were the Barbarians”. The truth be told, the mongols were more barbaric than they were peaceful. They were able to conquer more than 4,800,000 miles of land using brutal and strategic military tactics, destroy and conquer cities, along with using extremely harsh punishments for their prisoners. Because of this, the mongols were able to stay in power for about 300 years. Many people believe that they mongols were more peaceful than they were barbaric because of how economically stable they were. However the mongols killed thousands and left millions terrified across Asia.
... were positive, one may argue that these individuals only saw the tolerant and fair-minded side of the Mongols, and not the relentless warrior part of the society who was known for its “dirty” tactics of war, which went as far as launching diseased-ridden corpses over the walls of castles during sieges. Alternatively, one may argue that the scholars who provided negative documentation of the Mongols only saw the destructive side, not the open-minded side of the society who were known for their cultural acceptance. Although these accounts allowed for an adequate idea of the nature of the Mongols, a record from a peasant who was not a member of the upper class in their society, as all reports presented were from historians, scholars, and political leaders. This would allow for a different perspective on the issue and would produce a better understanding of the topic.
The Mongols, or as the Western Europeans called them, the Tartars, were a nomadic, militant people that dominated the battlefield during the pre-industrial time period (“Tartars” 7). Over the span of the 13th century, from the Central Asian steppes in the east to the Arabian lands to the west, the Tartars subdued the unfortunate inhabitants and expanded their empire vastly. To the fear and dismay of the Western Europeans, the Tartars desired to triumph over all of Eurasia; therefore, the Western Europeans were to be conquered next. News of the imminent Tartarian attack rapidly spread through West Europe like a wildfire, and the powerful Holy Roman Church contended to prepare a strategy against the onslaught. In the year 1245, Pope Innocent IV, the head of the Church at the time, sent a group of Friars led by Giovanni da Pian del Carpini to gather some knowledge about the Tartars. It was a dreaded mission, one that would probably end in a terrible death, since the Tartars were a cruel people towards outsiders. Nevertheless, Carpini valiantly ventured into the unknown darkness, and returned to his homeland with valuable information about the Tartars. Through the insight he gained during his travels, he wrote his account of the Tartars in a report called the “Historia Mongalorum” (“Tartars” 19), which is known today as “The Story of the Mongols Whom We Call the Tartars”.
The Mongols were a group of barbarians led by Genghis Khan. They were ruthless and destroyed everything in their path, but they also led to many positive things in the world. The Mongolians of the Asian Steppe had a positive impact on the world during their rule of the Asian continent from 1206 to 1368 by influencing laws, uniting China, and spreading messages and inventions. Many people liked the Mongols despite their destructive ways.
When the word “Mongol” is said I automatically think negative thoughts about uncultured, barbaric people who are horribly cruel and violent. That is only because I have only heard the word used to describe such a person. I have never really registered any initial information I have been taught about the subject pass the point of needing and having to know it. I felt quite incompetent on the subject and once I was given an assignment on the book, Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern Age, I was very perplexed for two reasons. One I have to read an outside book for a class that already requires a substantial amount of time reading the text, and secondly I have to write a research paper in History. I got over it and read the book, which surprisingly enough interested me a great deal and allow me to see the Moguls for more than just a barbaric group of Neanderthals, but rather a group of purpose driven warriors with a common goal of unity and progression. Jack Weatherford’s work has given me insight on and swayed my opinion of the Mongols.
The Mongols were a tough, strong, and a fierce Asian group of people. Their reign
In this book Weatherford presents an extremely biased view of the Mongols. He only talks about the wonderful things that the Mongols did, as well as their victories. His presentation only makes the Mongols sound immaculate. To other nations, he might sound as if he were terrifying, therefore making his immaculate picture a biased view.
The Mongols were an influential group of people. They’re rule reached the far reaches of the globe even reaching places in Europe. The Mongol impact is clearly seen in the Persian and Chinese societies. Although it was the Mongols who took over both these societies, they still differed in many aspects.
The Mongol empire and Alexander The Great’s empire were two of the most interesting and powerful empires of all time. Yet, even with many similarities there are many differences as well between these two great empires. The Mongol empire began during the 13th and 14th centuries in which it was the largest land empire in all of world history. It was located beginning in the Central Asia and eventually spread all the way to Central Europe. Alexander The Great’s empire, Macedonia, was a Greek empire located in Central Greece. Both of these giant civilizations became the biggest empires the world has ever seen.
Amitai-Priess, Rueven and David O. Morgan, The Mongol Empire and It's Legacy, Brill Publishing Co., Leiden, Boston, Koln, 1999.
Later, on the year of 1177, the young boy was captured by one of his father’s old tribes, the Tayichiud. These men enslaved and tortured him. It wasn’t until a father of the tribe, Chilaun, helped him escape. He soon joined forces with other men and his name spread quickly around the Mongols. At this time, he started studying the “difficult political climate” between the tribes and grew up to learn the truth of society which included tribal warfare, thievery, raids, corruption, and continuing acts of revenge.
The Mongols were a fierce people who conquered many lands under the strong leadership of Genghis and Kublai Khan. From their origins in Asia to the growth of their empire that stretched from the Pacific Ocean to Eastern Europe, their inspiration of Europe lasted for centuries. Both good and bad things came from them, but overall, their reign was for the betterment of European culture. The advancements Europe made within the 1200’s could not have been accomplished without the successes of the Mongol Empire.
Smitha, F. E. (n.d.). Genghis Khan and the Great Mongol Empire. In fsmitha.com. Retrieved December 11, 2013
...tural diversity of societies and cultural diffusion promoted a stable economy from the successful trade and the new codes allowed for a prosperous time of religious tolerance and safety. It is crucial that the Mongols should be rightfully labeled as civilized because they did not match the idea of what barbarism is. Unlike popular belief, the Mongols did in fact have an enriched culture from trade and displayed a level of respect for one another through their codes of conduct. Also, although it may seem that the Mongols may not have any standard morals from their cruel battle tactics, they indeed did since they displayed that with their laws against theft and adultery. All this suggests that the Mongols were far from barbarians like what many from history claim and instead of wrecking havoc during that time, helped create a strong foundation of peace and stability.
The Mongols were nomadic people that were raised from birth to defend their empire, had superior military equipment, used advanced military tactics that Europeans did not even use, and spread fear throughout the world due to the rumors that spread by unconquered civilizations. As a result of Mongols conquering many civilizations, they were able to spread their legacy of destruction and disruption, which is still discussed today. Using these fear tactics along with their superior military equipment and military tactics the Mongols expanded their empire across vast distances. Examples of this can be seen in 1209 when the Mongols began to raid the His-Hsia Empire and finally conquered it in 1227. Another example was the conquering of the Khwarazmian