Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Effect of Mongol rule
In the first section Weatherford discusses the rise of Genghis Khan and the making of Mongolia. The first chapter begins with Khans attack on the Khwarazmian Empire, as was previously stated, Khan covered millions of miles of land which consisted of most Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and some Central Asia. Weatherford provides the reader with a decent amount of information concerning how the Mongols viewed warfare and how Khan took power. Weatherford also mentions Genghis Khan was actually not born a military genius, but learned through trial and error and that's what makes Khan such an extraordinary leader. The second section deals with the expansion of the Mongol Empire outside of Mongolia. Here Weatherford attempts to put the massacres and destruction …show more content…
The third section highlights the impact the Mongols had on the World. It begins with the breakup of the empire and some changes the occurred in the Khanates that would lead to the transformation of the world. People began to take advantage of the new secure roads which lead to the migration of people, ideas, and technology. Of course trade as always been an important part of every civilization but, one small but ever so devastating item made its way into Europe from the Mongol Empire: the Black Plague, the effect the plague had on Europe didn't go unnoticed and are very well known and need no further comment. Furthermore, Weatherford also states the connections between the Mongols and the Renaissance, and the evolution of modern Europe. For example, the printing press, compass, blast furnace, gunpowder, as well as Chinese painting styles from the Mongol Empire help gave rise to the Renaissance. Its quite clear Weatherford is truly brilliant writer. Yet, despite how acclaimed Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World is, its clear Weatherford is struggling with some material he seems to not fully
To start, the mongols were able to used brutal and strategic military tactics that helped them conquer more than 4,800,000 miles of land. The Mongols leader “Genghis Khan” was a very smart and strategic leader. He organized his army into groups of ten, hundred, and one thousand. If such groups runs away or flees, the entire group was put to death. Genghis Khans army was able to succeed in conquering land due to horses. His army
... 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 Pax Mongolica, also known as the Mongol Peace and Pax Tatarica, was brought up at the end of the time of Mongols’ conquests. Western Scholars designated the fourteenth century as the Pax Mongolica. The Pax Mongolica contributed to the development of a new global culture because the Mongol Khans pursued peaceful trade and diplomacy (220). The bubonic plague epidemic of the 1300s led to the destruction of the Mongol Empire because of the deaths it caused; also, the plague had demoralized the living and deprived the Mongol Golden Family of its primary source of support by cutting off trade and tribute (247).
I am going to critically review a newspaper article on the death of Hamzah Khan from Bradford. I will discuss the main findings the research methodology and the way in which it may or may not be useful in the contribution to our understanding of child welfare. I will also include information on child abuse and on the different agencies. The newspaper article is called Hamzah Khan: the harrowing story of an 'invisible' child. (Pidd, 2013)
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”.
In conclusion, During the Mongols had a positive impact on the world because they introduced the freedom and spread of religion, the peaceful period, and the influence of the pony
There has been great conversation about whether the Mongols were barbarians or acted Barbaric throughout their lifetime. When looking at the Mongol civilization to determine if they are barbaric or not depends on several factors, what does barbaric mean, how do the Mongol cities act, and how do their people act away from their cities. The major thing to look at when determining if the Mongols are barbaric, what classifies a barbarian and what does it mean to be barbaric. We can see that in the times of ancient Rome, barbarians are just foreigners to their land. The term barbaric has changed as time has changed from being a foreigner to acting uncivilized and being a savage people. So if we are using the old Roman term for barbarian; then yes the Mongols were barbarians, but we are
The Mongols have influenced many of the concept and idea that we still see utilized today in politics and international relations. Jack Weatherford tremendously changed my insight into the true Mongol and not the barbaric, savage I once thought of just by hearing the word. I resent this research paper a great deal, and I know that I may not get the grade I want, but at least I did learn something new and destroyed the previous thought I had about these people just by completing it so I feel it served its purpose and that’s the only reason my mind was changed.
The Mongols were also known for their surprise attack which spread to other armies, making it a keen warfare used all around the world. This battle tactic consisted of a group of men who are fighting out on the battlefield and they begin to retreat only to draw the enemy into a trap. The enemy runs into a rain of arrows as the rest of the men are hiding off to the side with loaded weapons, and fierce ground fighters ready for combat. This is one key that the Mongols had to help them conquer Asia. Lastly, the Mongols had a positive impact on the world because they united most of Asia.
In the 13th century BC, the Mongols rose to power and conquered an empire whose size still has yet to matched. The Mongols conquered lands such as China, leaving such a lasting influence on them that their legacy still lives on. However, despite the Mongols success, their actions have left a constantly ongoing debate on whether they were barbarians, seen and portrayed by different societies of their time as people with no morale or modern civilities, or civilized people who were just feared by other societies. Although the Mongols are generally now seen as Barbarians because of their violent and barbaric war tactics they used to instill fear in people, they are actually civilized because they had a strategically organized army, and because they were accepting of the customs of other peoples. These two elements would eventually lead them to their success.
The military exploits of the Mongols under Ghengis Khan as well as other leaders and the ruthless brutality that characterized the Mongol conquests have survived in legend. The impact of the invasions can be traced through history from the different policies set forth to the contributions the Mongols gave the world. The idea of the ruthless barbarian’s intent upon world domination will always be a way to signify the Mongols. Living steadfast upon the barren steppe they rode out of Mongolia to pursue a better life for their people.
1. What was the impact of the mongol conquest of Russia? Of the Islamic heartlands?
Over the years there have been many great nomadic groups, such as the Vikings and the Kievan, but no nomadic group has been more successful than the Mongols. The Mongols have had many lasting influences on Russia, China, and even Europe. The Mongols have left a mark on the European trading systems in technologies as well as in their trading systems trade routes. One thing that stayed the same throughout Europe was their many religion.
This story can be summarized by dividing the story into three major sections that represent a genealogy of the Genghis Khan ancestors, the lifestyle of Genghis Khan and the story of Genghis son and Ogodei his successor. This piece of early time’s literature was translated and edited by Jack Weatherford and it was not released until 16th February, 2010. The piece of work restores early history’s most prominent figures to the positions they rightfully deserves. It clears the picture of the nomadic lifestyle of the Mongols and it is rich with information regarding the society of the Mongols in the 12th and the 13th centuries” (Kahn, 2005).
Weatherford, J. McIver. Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World. New York: Crown, 2004. Print.