Similarities of the Mongolian and Macedonian Conquest and Empire

To much of the surprise of the Western world, the Mongol Empire expanded rapidly, both through use of brutality and tolerance. The Mongols were aggressive in battle, unlike the world had previously seen (Mongols in World History 1). They utilized novel military strategy and maintained heightened standards of skill and training. By these means, as well as psychological warfare which induced terror among those they conquered, the Mongols were able to spread rapidly, so much so that their conquest initiated the first direct contact between Europe and Eastern Asia.

Their military skill proved advantageous in the spread of their Empire, but the practice of tolerance, which anteceded their vicious brutality, often was the driving source of stability of their newly conquered lands. They assimilated well with other cultures and practiced both religious and cultural tolerance, which encouraged a mutually responsive and accepted relationship between the Mongols and newly conquered people (Mongols in World History 6). Such cohesiveness allowed their exaggerated expansion sustainable for the time of their rule.

Much like the Mongols, the Macedonians practiced brutality in conquering, but were also somewhat tolerant of local religions and customs. From a military perspective, the Macedonians were skilled and maintained technically abled fighting forces. Advanced skills and military innovations, such as the Macedonian phalanx and Torsion catapults, improved their ability in conquest quickly, allowing Alexander the Great to control one of the largest empires the world had yet seen. In respect to the tolerance practiced by Alexander the Great during his conquest, Alexander encouraged a “bicultural future” in which Macedonians were encouraged to adopt customs of those they had conquered (Demand 314). This helped to blend cultures and to ease the acquisition of power and maintenance of stability. He practiced “shared administration” and allowed those he had conquered, including the Persians, to be integrated into his Macedonian army (Demand 314). As well, Alexander went so far as to adopt certain dress and customs expected of rulers of his conquered lands in order to emphasize the legitimacy of his new authority.

Both the Mongol and Macedonian Empires practiced mutual cultural assimilation in order to encourage cohesion and stability of their newly conquered lands. While this tolerance is certainly unexpected to follow such vicious, military brutality, both of these peoples were able to successfully conquer new lands in an unprecedented, aggressive fashion, and then transition to a more positive and responsive culture.

-Meagan Stevenson

Sources: The Mongols in World History, p. 1-6 transcript of the text found at <http://afe.easia.columbia.edu/mongols>

Demand, Chapter 15, Alexander the Great, p. 314

*Sources can be found in class reading syllabus.

History’s Darkest Times

April 1, 2019 | Blog 5

In a few years, one man orchestrated the deaths of millions of men, women, and children across Europe, Asia, and Africa.

This man was Adolf Hitler.

If you were thinking of Genghis Khan, you’re not wrong. But, I’ll save him for later comparison.

From the rise to fall of Nazi Germany (1933-1945) under the Führer, the Nazis murdered millions across Europe for reasons concerning race, religion, handicap, sexual preference, and politics. Annually, the Nazis killed six to seven people out of every hundred in occupied Europe. The odds of a European dying under Nazi occupation were about one in fifteen.

How did this all start?

Adolf Hitler blamed the loss of World War I and German economic depression on Jewish capitalism. As World War II broke out, Jews fell victim to Germany’s policies of oppression and extermination.

Jews were not the only ones who were victim to Nazi Germany’s ruthlessness. Those of other races and religions were targeted as well. Political opponents were eliminated, and “undesirables” were euthanized.

However, German occupation was also distinguished by tolerance for those who were compliant. A brilliant example of such tolerance was in the occupation of Denmark (1940 to 1945). The Danish government immediately cooperated with the Germans, as it wanted to preserve Denmark while accommodating the wishes of the Germans.

Most Danes, as a result, were able to continue their daily lives much as before occupation. Although there were shortages of certain goods in Denmark, the Danes had one of the highest standards of living in Europe during the war years.

How is Nazi Germany so similar to the Mongol Empire? Similar to how Nazi Germany spread rapidly through blitzkrieg, the Mongol Empire expanded through the success of skillful military leaders. The Mongols relied on their archery cavalry, and this led to the empire, at the peak of its power, to be almost six times larger than Nazi Germany.

If the Mongols’ goal was to be the most brutal people ever to walk on this planet, they succeeded. Almost wiping out 10% of the world’s population, the Mongol armies decimated cities and used captives as sacrificial lambs. Historians estimate the death toll to be nearly 40 million people, double the number Nazi Germany so proudly boasted.

“They came, they sapped, they burnt, they slew, they plundered, and they departed,” Persian historian Ata-Malik Juvayni recollected bluntly during the Mongol invasion of Central Asia.

While crueler, the Mongols were still more tolerant than the Nazis. Those who submitted to the Mongols enjoyed a fearless life while only paying taxes. The Mongols held a high tolerance for other religions and cultures. In fact, the Mongols were so successful due to their ability to assimilate and adapt to different cultures.

During the Pax Mongolica, the Mongols promoted interstate relations and provided travel and protection for artisans and merchants. The Mongols even recognized the importance of trade, resulting in tax breaks for traders.

Examining the Mongols and Germans side-by-side, we recognize striking similarities in regards to extreme brutality and surprising tolerance. Hitler’s Nazi Germany is well known for its slaughter of millions in an attempt to provide living space for their superior race, while the Mongols left a path of destruction as Genghis Khan led his armies far across Asia into Europe and the Middle East. Both leaders’ iron fists on conquered territories relaxed, allowing religion, culture, and trade to develop and flourish.

Nonetheless, the reigns of Genghis Khan and Adolf Hitler left dark stains on the tapestry of human history, and we as people of the modern times can hopefully learn some lessons about the past to not repeat the same mistakes in the future.

— Cameron Guan

Word Count: 595

Sources:

Quote by Ata-Malik Juvayni on Mongol invasion of Transoxania (c. 1219)

The Conquerors

Every so often over the course of history, an exceptional leader blindingly outshines his fellow men and undertakes a course of action that leaves a permanent imprint upon the future. Two such men that will never be forgotten are Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan themselves. The men, swaths of land, and resources these men trampled underfoot and held in the palm of their hand have very few if any times been matched. Both conquerors and their empires exemplified similar levels of brutality and tolerance, and though both failed to last, they both exemplified some of the greatest single-handed conquests and birthings of empires in history.

Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan come from very different backgrounds. Being born to King Philip of Macedon, Alexander had a somewhat better start to his empire. As Alexander rode over Persia and Asia, not only did he allow local populaces to retain their culture and religion, he even adopted practices of the people he encountered, much to the chagrin of his own. Similarly, Genghis Khan was relatively tolerant of any culture that his conquest encountered, his people even adopting and integrating into their own other cultures’ practices as they spread across Asia. Both Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan’s empires ruled firmly but made plenty of allowances for the original values of the cultures they subjugated.

While both empires displayed relative tolerance in certain cases, when met with resistance, neither regime faltered when it came to responding with far greater murderous ferocity than their enemy. Alexander the Great himself, during the siege of the Phoenician city of Tyre, he reportedly crucified more than 2,000 survivors on the beach and selling 30,000 more into slavery, not to mention the 6,000 battle casualties.

Though Alexander was brutal, brutality cannot be matched when it comes to the inhumanity of the Mongols. A rare survivor, Ibn al-Althir describes in great detail the atrocities the infamous Mongol hordes committed while on rampage across the entirety of Asia. The Mongols “spared none, slaying women and men and children, ripping open pregnant women and killing unborn babes.”¹ From the perspective of the conquered, the Mongols appeared to have no morals, “and regard nothing as unlawful, for they eat all beasts…, nor do they recognize the marriage-tie,”² furthering their countenance as other-worldly. When it comes to sheer atrocity, both conquerors vie for a strong case, but the Mongol hordes beat out Alexander the Great’s army every time.

As if history repeats itself, we constantly see certain individuals in history transcend their fellows and become a driving force behind a cause that is perpetuated by their followers. Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan both exemplify such an individual with their charisma and pure leadership capability. In terms of the characteristics of the empires, both offered relative independence for those who acknowledged their superiority, but when met with intransigence, the consequences for the perpetrators were bore from extreme obduracy, mercilessness, and pure barbarism. Such men above the rest must be acknowledged and learned from.

—Gregory Mathias
Word Count: 506

^{1, 2}Al-Althir, Ibn. The Perfect History. 1225

Mongols and Nazis

An expansive and feared regime led by one man whose charisma and leadership united a nation and created a world power known by all. This statement applies to several countries throughout history, but two in particular come to mind. First is the Mongol Empire which reigned throughout Asia for roughly 200 years from 1200-1400. The Mongolian empire was unified under the influence of Genghis Khan who radicalized the military and the technology that they used creating an environment which allowed for the rapid expansion of the empire. The brutality of the Mongolians was also well known. As described in The Perfect History by Ibn al-athir the Mongol hordes were more fearsome than the antichrist himself. Al-athir states that “…these spared none, slaying men and women and children, ripping open pregnant women and killing unborn babies”.[1] This description strikes fear and because it came from a direct victim of the attack, it is clear to see that the idea of the Mongol empire created a sense of psychological warfare, which only strengthened the fear of the Mongols and the therefore the success of Mongolian attacks. The Mongols were such a fear-inducing group of people that even al-athir claims that the events are “so horrible that I shrank from ever recording it”.[2] Unlike prior empires, the Mongols relied on fear as a primary means of expansion and control. This is similar to the fear that the Nazis in 1940s Germany used to control certain populations and peoples.

One of Adolf Hitler’s characteristics that helped him rise to power was his charm and ability to unite people. This is much like Genghis Khan who’s ability to unite an entire nation together was a powerful tool that led to the strength of the Mongols. Much like the Mongols, the Nazis believed that those who did not stand with them, were standing against them and must be eliminated. For the Nazis, the main opponent who they viewed as being against them was the Jewish. Hitler promoted the Jews as the cause of all of Germany’s problems which created a hostile environment for them to live in. Because of the atrocities committed by the Nazis, a similar environment of fear was created for many people other than Jews. People became fearful of speaking out against the Nazis because those that did disappeared. Much like the Mongols, Nazis used this fear as a means of expansion and because of that a small Nazi empire was created throughout Europe. Even to this day, many of the crimes that the Nazis partook in are not believed by some because it is difficult to believe something so terrible could occur. This is nearly identical to some of the statements made by al-athir about how he struggled to have the heart to write about what the Mongols did.

-Brett Eckert

Word Count: 482

[1] A Perfect History, Google Drive folder

[2] Ibid

The British and Mongolian Empires

When we think of the British, we often think of adjectives such as “proper” and “civilized”, but the British Empire was far from that. Despite being the root of much of modern civilization, including the United States, the British Empire founded itself on principles of oppression, racism, and cruelty, similar to those of the Mongolian Empire.

For example, the British Empire began with relatively innocent exploration and the desire to discover more of the world, but this soon led to domination over lands explored. Beginning with the Caribbean, the British established a plantation economy of sugar cane, which relied heavily on slaves from Africa, many of whom died simply from brutal conditions during transit.[1] Slave labor was quick to spread to the Americas, where they continued to experience abuse and inhumane treatment. Despite the outlaw of the slave trade in Britain in 1807, its horrendous effects are analogous to those of the Mongolian Empire and their senseless “slaying of women and men and children”[2]. Much like the Mongol treatment of the Chinese, Arabs, and Indians, the British employed a system of controlled aggression in which they supported those they conquered, with the caveat that they offer unconditional support to the crown.

Similarly, the British and Mongolian Empires spawned the two largest empires in history. Accomplishing such a feat is no easy task, and each was able to do so through sheer brutality and control over those they came across. An example of this in the British Empire was their assertion of power over the indigenous people of North America. Their treatment of Native Americans was similar to that of Africans in that they aimed “’to compel them to “drudgery, work, and slavery,’ so English colonists could live ‘like Soldiers upon the fruit of their labor.’”[3] These malignant practices are identical to the Mongol practices in China, “destroying them [villages] and slaying most their inhabitants, of whom none escaped save a small remnant.”[4] Despite existing several hundred years apart, the actions by each empire clearly demonstrate the foundation of violence used to establish power.

At a first glance, it may not seem like the British Empire is even remotely comparable to the Mongolian Empire, but they share many commonalities such as use of oppression and violence. In the modern era, we often completely neglect the wrongdoings of the British Empire, and think only of atrocities committed by regimes like Mongolian Empire and other authoritarian regimes. However, despite all effort to disregard wrongdoings of Western countries like Britain, we cannot not forget the negative impact it had on millions of people around the world.

— Griffin Hamilton

Word Count: 456

[1] http://www.loc.gov/teachers/classroommaterials/presentationsandactivities/presentations/timeline/colonial/indians/

[2] Class Google Folder, Frameworks Crisis of Mongol Age: 1200 to 1400

[3] http://www.loc.gov/teachers/classroommaterials/presentationsandactivities/presentations/timeline/colonial/indians/

[4] Class Google Folder, Frameworks Crisis of Mongol Age: 1200 to 1400

Rise of Empires

The Mongol Empire rose out of northern Asia and quickly took control a majority of Asia, Eastern Europe, and began to push into Western Europe before internal strife forced the Mongols to retreat and eventually brought an end to the empire. Genghis Khan conquered the Mongolian tribes and united them under his banner. They then marched throughout Asia conquering as they went, becoming known for their brutality. The Mongols nomadic lifestyle allowed their forces to mobile. Whatever the Mongols needed they brought with them. In The Perfect History, Ibn al-Athir stated, “…they needed no commissariat, nor the conveyance of supplies, for they have with them sheep, cows, horses and the like quadrupeds, the flesh of which they eat, and naught else.” This allowed them to be fast and not impeded by the need for supplies. They conquered swiftly and it was a surprise to many of their enemies. The Mongols built a vast empire, the largest the world had ever seen, in the blink of an eye.

Nazi Germany did something similar in the mid 20th century. At the end of World War I, Germany was decimated economically and left without a military by the Treaty of Versailles. Socially and politically, Germany was left in disarray and many Germans did not know what to do. This instability allowed Adolf Hitler to seize power and plunge the world back into war. Hitler re-established Germany as a military power and used his political power to unite Germany. He conquered the lands surrounding Germany to reunite the German speaking peoples of Europe and then began his conquest of Europe by invading Poland. However, Nazi Germany did so through a new method of warfare called the Blitzkrieg or lightning war. Blitzkrieg was intended to attack and subdue the enemy before they could organize and respond. This relied heavily on German tanks to punch through enemy lines and cause disorder. This can be compared to the Mongols who fought adeptly on horseback. The Mongols could strike fast by riding in on horseback and cause mass disarray, ending the battle swiftly and moving on with their conquests. Nazi Germany conquered and built an empire spanning most of the European mainland in the blink of an eye. However, the German strategy of Blitzkrieg eventually degraded as they got bogged down in Russia and their advance was stalled on both fronts. The fall of the German empire was as swift as its rise. However, it was not due to internal strife, but due to their inability to keep their supply lines intact and a general lack of resources as Germany began to crumble under the intense pressure placed on them by the allies.

The Mongols were able to conquer and hold territory because they used their nomadic lifestyle to their advantage. There had no supply lines their enemies could target so it was impossible to subdue them indirectly. To defeat the Mongols, one had to face them head on in combat and the Mongols were as much warriors as they were brutal. It seemed the only force capable of stopping the Mongols were themselves and they did just that when they were forced to stop their advance into Western Europe because of a crisis of succession. Empires before them had fallen due to internal crisis, and the Mongolian Empire was no different.

-Ethan Fessler

Word Count: 524

Works Cited:Crisis of the Mongol Age, 13.1b:Ibn al-Athir Perfect History

A Couplet of Doom

They captured swaths of territory with unspeakable violence. They struck terror into the hearts of those inhabiting the lands they conquered. No military force could initially counter their advances. Could they be the Mongols? Or are they the Islamic State group? A brief look at the history of the two suggests it is not either, but both.

The Mongols, of course, came first. Around the year 1220 the Mongols swept into the Middle East, leaving behind a swath of destruction that was later recorded by Ibn al-Athir. Athir was utterly horrified by the Mongol conquests: not only did he directly compare them to the Antichrist, he gave the Antichrist a more positive review. Given his testimony that the Mongols “[ripped] open pregnant women and [killed] unborn babies” [1], the repulsed reaction is not terribly surprising. In fact, Athir is so appalled by the atrocities he claims they were “the greatest catastrophe and the most dire calamity…which befell all men…since God Almighty created Adam until now” [1]. Now, Athir had spent time following the armies of Saladin, and was thus no stranger to warfare or violence. For him to be so utterly stunned as to proclaim the worst calamity in the history of mankind reflects the sheer magnitude and ruthlessness of the Mongols.

In late-2014, the United Nations released a report [2] detailing atrocities committed by the Islamic State group in Iraq. According to this report, the Islamic State groups undertook executions, assassinations, and other killings (to include stonings, decapitations, and more), and practiced the use of civilian human shields. They also particularly targeted women and religious leaders and monuments. These examples only scratch the surface of the acts detailed in the 40-page report, but nonetheless one can draw parallels to the acts of the Mongols.

There is some irony in the fact the Mongols persecuted Muslim populations in their conquest, while the conquests of the Islamic State group were motivated by their faith (hence the name, and the goal of creating an independent Islamic state). Still, even the Islamic State group attacked other Muslims, and subjugated them to horrific acts.

The similarities between the two are nevertheless striking. Expanding rapidly, the two both conquered large areas of territory and committed acts of atrocity within their boundaries. The Mongols, however, were more given to tolerance of other people within the lands they conquered. They were open to the existence of several religions concurrently. By contrast, the Islamic State group targeted and persecuted those of even different sects of Islam heavily, not to mention Christians, Jews, and others within the land they conquered.

In the downfall of both, too, there are differences. The Mongol conquest was halted when a succession crisis (like with nearly any empire) forced the advances to halt on the eastern edge of Europe. The Islamic State group, on the other hand, was forced to retreat after a local coalition with international backing (read as: incessant airstrikes from western nations) wrested back control of the conquered lands.

The world was unprepared for the Mongol invasion and never expected anything like it. While the exact form it took may have been unusual, the Islamic State group’s rise was predictable based on regional turmoil and past example. Despite this, the two bear remarkable similarities stretching from their rapid speed of expansion, persecution of those within their borders, and legacy of terror. In the (alleged) words of Mark Twain, “history does not repeat itself, but it often rhymes.”

Tom Vilinskis

Word Count: 548

Sources:

[1] The Perfect History, Ibn al-Athir c.1225

[2] Report on the Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict in Iraq: 6 July – 10 September 2014 https://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Countries/IQ/UNAMI_OHCHR_POC_Report_FINAL_6July_10September2014.pdf

[3] ISIS: The first terror group to build an Islamic state?https://www.cnn.com/2014/06/12/world/meast/who-is-the-isis/index.html

Relentless Regimes

The Mongol Empire was a very brutal regime that had no limits. They conquered in all directions to include most of Central Asia and even Eastern Asia. A regime in history that is somewhat similar to the Mongols in regards to conquest and brutality, is the German Nazis during World War II. Like the Mongols, the Nazis were relentless in their conquest in murdering the Jewish people to include women and children in unethical warfare. The Mongol Empire and German Nazis have some similarities in their ruthless acts of war-fighting and conquest.

The Mongols conquered other cities for the sake of their warfighting mentality and revenge. Temujin took it upon himself to reunite the Mongol empire and conquered surrounding tribes in the process. Temujin describes their purpose as, “Man’s greatest good fortune is to chase and defeat his enemy, seize all his possessions, leave his married women weeping and wailing”[1] (400). During their conquests, the Mongols would slaughter all enemies (including women and children), rape women, cut open pregnant women’s wombs, and boil enemy chiefs. During World War II, the German Nazis were similar to the Mongols in their level of brutality. They were relentless in killing their enemies to also include women and children. They used immoral warfare to include gas chambers. They were able to gain power quickly with their strong military, similar to the Mongols.

Obviously, the Mongols and Nazis had many differences. The Nazis targeted a specific group of people, being the Jewish, while the Mongols would slaughter anybody in their way. The Nazis also did conquer many cities, but for the sake of spreading their beliefs of the “superior race” and capturing Jewish people. The reason the Nazis were able to get away with what they were doing for a while, was through propaganda. Adolf Hitler convinced his people that what they were doing was morally right and deceived other nations using propaganda. In this case, Adolf Hitler can be related to Genghis Khan because of their ruthless leadership in conquest and rule. Another major difference is that the Mongols’ conquest lasted over a century while the Nazis only lasted a few years before being defeated.

I believe that although both Mongols and Nazis conducted inhumane tactics in warfighting, the German Nazis are more heavily criticized because of the time period, and it has had more of an impact on today’s society since WWII took place only about seventy-five years ago as opposed to the Mongolian regime which took place in the twelfth and thirteenth century. Most of society now does not understand the terrifying Mongols and their impact on Central Asia and Eastern Europe in early history especially since the Mongol history is still not fully understood.

-Kevin Semma

Word count: 432

[1] Spodek