Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Toto · 05-03-2005, 01:16 AM

Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World

I have run across several references to this book recently.

From this review

Quote:

In his superb book, Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World, Weatherford presents the 13th century conqueror as a progressive and innovative ruler who not only established international law but subordinated his own power to it. He promoted social tolerance and humanitarian values, outlawing torture, abolishing the sale of women, granting diplomatic immunity, and establishing free trade. He even built schools and championed literacy (thanks to Genghis Khan, Mongolia today has a higher literacy rate than the United States).

Genghis Kahn’s contributions to Western civilization can hardly be overstated. His trade routes introduced to Europe technologies such as printing, the cannon, compass, and the abacus, as well as Mongol products like tea, lemons, carrots, playing cards, rugs, and pants. The Mongols also developed the first international postal system and paper currency.

. . .

Perhaps the greatest key to his success—and the biggest surprise to emerge from Weatherford’s book—was that Genghis Khan was a deeply spiritual man who established laws protecting religious freedom. Unlike most other great conquerors, Genghis Khan did not force his religion on the nations he vanquished. He believed that to conquer a nation, one had to conquer the hearts of its people, and he achieved this by allowing them to worship any deity, and adhere to any scripture, they wanted. And because his empire included every religion, from Buddhism and Christianity to Judaism, Manichaeanism and Islam, each of which claimed to be the one true faith, he hoped to minimize the religious strife he’d seen divide nations.

There were a number of Christians who fought in Genghis Khan's armies, including Georgians. One of his wives was a Christian, along with some of his descendents. From here:

Quote:

"The 13th century reign of Genghis Kahn was a significant time for the growth of Christianity, which had been introduced as early as the 8th century by Nestorian Christian missionaries from Persia. Genghis Kahn was married to a Christian woman. One of the Khan's daughters-in-law, Sorkaktani, was a Nestorian Christian who became the mother of three great emperors, including Kublai Khan. Another significant Christian influence in the 13th century was the assignment by Pope Innocent the IV of more than a dozen Dominican and Franciscan missionaries to Mongolia."[1]

Clivedurdle · 05-06-2005, 12:31 AM

What damage has the concept of a mythical Christ as the centre point of history done to our understanding of what really happened in the Roman empire and since?

Genghis Khan historically was the most feared person in the middle ages by Christendom, and almost took Vienna. But we have an entirely propagandised perspective.

History uses terms like the allied view of history, maybe it is time to be clear about the severe warping effects of a Christ view of history - we have a "year zero" based on a myth!

RussianM3_dude · 05-06-2005, 04:08 AM

Genghis Khan was never even close to Europe. You are confusing him with the Ottomans who besieged Vienna in 1670(?)

Clivedurdle · 05-06-2005, 04:47 AM

His grandson Batu Khan raised Moscow in 1237, took Kiev in 1240, defeated Polish princes on 9 April 1241 at Legnica. I can't find the reference to Vienna now but they were definitely near and that is the westernmost advance of the mongols. Christendom was terrified of them.

Kosh · 05-06-2005, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clivedurdle

What damage has the concept of a mythical Christ as the centre point of history done to our understanding of what really happened in the Roman empire and since?

Genghis Khan historically was the most feared person in the middle ages by Christendom, and almost took Vienna. But we have an entirely propagandised perspective.

History uses terms like the allied view of history, maybe it is time to be clear about the severe warping effects of a Christ view of history - we have a "year zero" based on a myth!

Is it due to a Christ centric viewpoint, or more because he damanged Rome, from which our culture descends? History is written by the victors.

Clivedurdle · 05-07-2005, 01:55 AM

The key victor is probably Constantine - did he invent a new psychological battle field weapon - the cross on the shields and the belief in the soldiers heads that the creator of the universe is on their side?

This battle field weapon was then used on the civilian populations, by constructing a heirarchy and introducing concepts like submission to the will of god - very different to the pagan anarchist early democratic traditions.

Even our thinking has been warped by this christ centred view of history - we automatically assume our perspective is superior - well we are the children of god and need to save the world.

Genghis Khan was so important because it was superior militarily and based on a meld of very careful planning and discipline, passion, free, highly skilled individuals, striking from the middle of an impassable desert.

Has anyone looked at xianity as a new form of psychological warfare, giving the believer a major advantage?

andrewcriddle · 05-07-2005, 05:37 AM

Even if the Western World had not chosen to date events from the supposed birth of Christ it seems extremely unlikely that it would have decided to date events from the invasion of Europe by the sons of Genghis 1240-1241 CE.

Andrew Criddle

Clivedurdle · 05-07-2005, 05:51 AM

Might have if they had conquered us!

Seriously though, are there studies from a military perspective that believing in one god, that you are saved by that god and that if you die you will go to heaven, give you a military advantage?

Ghenghis Khan was such a threat because he defeated the xians, leading to cognitive dissonance - god can't be on our side, what sins have we committed.

Answerer · 05-07-2005, 11:01 AM

Ghenghis Khan is a nightmare to the Chinese, Indians, Persians and especially Muslims.

I think Catholic Christians benefit the most from his random invasion. In the end, his armies helped them to get rid of the bases of the Islamic sourage and give them a few centuries to recuperate. And they got the gunpower technology from since then.

Jabu Khan · 05-07-2005, 11:37 AM

I think the Mongol push into Europe was finally halted by Vlad Dracul wasn't it. Also known as Vlad the impaler and most likely the source of the Dracula legend. Good thing those Barbarous Mongels didn't stop the inquisition and all the impaling and crucifixions that those more enlightened flat-earth christians were spreading.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-06-2005, 12:31 AM	#2
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	What damage has the concept of a mythical Christ as the centre point of history done to our understanding of what really happened in the Roman empire and since? Genghis Khan historically was the most feared person in the middle ages by Christendom, and almost took Vienna. But we have an entirely propagandised perspective. History uses terms like the allied view of history, maybe it is time to be clear about the severe warping effects of a Christ view of history - we have a "year zero" based on a myth!

05-06-2005, 04:08 AM	#3
RussianM3_dude Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Switzerland. Posts: 1,683	Genghis Khan was never even close to Europe. You are confusing him with the Ottomans who besieged Vienna in 1670(?)

05-06-2005, 04:47 AM	#4
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	His grandson Batu Khan raised Moscow in 1237, took Kiev in 1240, defeated Polish princes on 9 April 1241 at Legnica. I can't find the reference to Vienna now but they were definitely near and that is the westernmost advance of the mongols. Christendom was terrified of them.

05-07-2005, 01:55 AM	#6
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	The key victor is probably Constantine - did he invent a new psychological battle field weapon - the cross on the shields and the belief in the soldiers heads that the creator of the universe is on their side? This battle field weapon was then used on the civilian populations, by constructing a heirarchy and introducing concepts like submission to the will of god - very different to the pagan anarchist early democratic traditions. Even our thinking has been warped by this christ centred view of history - we automatically assume our perspective is superior - well we are the children of god and need to save the world. Genghis Khan was so important because it was superior militarily and based on a meld of very careful planning and discipline, passion, free, highly skilled individuals, striking from the middle of an impassable desert. Has anyone looked at xianity as a new form of psychological warfare, giving the believer a major advantage?

05-07-2005, 05:37 AM	#7
andrewcriddle Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Birmingham UK Posts: 4,876	Even if the Western World had not chosen to date events from the supposed birth of Christ it seems extremely unlikely that it would have decided to date events from the invasion of Europe by the sons of Genghis 1240-1241 CE. Andrew Criddle

05-07-2005, 05:51 AM	#8
Clivedurdle Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: London UK Posts: 16,024	Might have if they had conquered us! Seriously though, are there studies from a military perspective that believing in one god, that you are saved by that god and that if you die you will go to heaven, give you a military advantage? Ghenghis Khan was such a threat because he defeated the xians, leading to cognitive dissonance - god can't be on our side, what sins have we committed.

05-07-2005, 11:01 AM	#9
Answerer Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Singapore Posts: 3,956	Ghenghis Khan is a nightmare to the Chinese, Indians, Persians and especially Muslims. I think Catholic Christians benefit the most from his random invasion. In the end, his armies helped them to get rid of the bases of the Islamic sourage and give them a few centuries to recuperate. And they got the gunpower technology from since then.

05-07-2005, 11:37 AM	#10
Jabu Khan Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: the impenetrable fortress of the bubbleheads Posts: 1,308	I think the Mongol push into Europe was finally halted by Vlad Dracul wasn't it. Also known as Vlad the impaler and most likely the source of the Dracula legend. Good thing those Barbarous Mongels didn't stop the inquisition and all the impaling and crucifixions that those more enlightened flat-earth christians were spreading.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.