Ghengis Khan: Barbarian Monster, or Glorious Emperor?

Discuss historical events and information concerning any culture, time, or location in our world (or even the frontier beyond).

Ghengis Khan?

Barbarian Monster
Glorious Emperor
Total votes : 22

Unread postby Emperor Zhuge Liang » Sat Dec 18, 2004 7:44 pm

The problem is that we today can sit here and critisize Genghis Khan and say how terrbile he was but we are judjing him by today's standards and ethics not the ones of the 13th-century stepps. Genghis was ruthless but he did not just randomly slaughter he wasn't a hero but he wasn't a hero but he wasn't a monster. I think the best way to describe him is that he was only human.
"As long as my dream comes to fruition I can sacrifice a capital city, or two, or three"
Dong Zhou DW4
Emperor Zhuge Liang
Posts: 188
Joined: Sun Nov 07, 2004 10:14 am
Location: Cramlington,England

Unread postby ???? » Sun Dec 19, 2004 4:35 am

Yes,Temhuchin killed many Chinese --- rather the Ta Chin due to what Ta Chin did every 2 months....They raided Mongolian village,enslaved the men and rapped women...

It was this that casued him to kill Chinese,leaving only corpse and remains...

However,he is Truly a Great Khan becasue no one ever betrayed him except his uncle and Kushluk beffore he united Mongol.
Wanna know more of FF XII?
Click here
Posts: 63
Joined: Sun Aug 08, 2004 9:47 am

Re: Ghengis Khan: Barbarian Monster, or Glorious Emperor?

Unread postby crisalex » Fri Sep 07, 2012 1:09 pm

hey frndz m luking for info abour junaid khan plz help…
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2012 12:53 pm

Re: Ghengis Khan: Barbarian Monster, or Glorious Emperor?

Unread postby Antiochus » Fri Sep 07, 2012 1:53 pm

A little bit of column A and a little bit of column B.

We are talking about a warlord, someone who's undeniable greatness came through violence and war at a time where where there were no such things as rules to control the excesses of warfare. He built an Empire, gave stability to some and death to others.

In the end, I would say that Genghis Khan is a fascinating figure. One of history's great conquerors, alongside Alexander the Great, Timur Lang, Napoleon and Qin Shi Huang; all great men who were both builders and destroyers...
If they can abolish fanaticism, let us pray for the advent of the sceptics.

Raymond Aron
The Opium of the Intellectuals
User avatar
Scholar of Shen Zhou
Posts: 2573
Joined: Fri Mar 28, 2003 5:29 pm
Location: Sherbrooke

Re: Ghengis Khan: Barbarian Monster, or Glorious Emperor?

Unread postby Mestre Will » Fri Sep 07, 2012 9:20 pm

I personally see him as the great conqueror , that is all. No matter if he did kill people or not , the idea of conquest without killing is hard to made expecialy when most of the other kingdoms see you as "Barbarian".

I did aprove the way he did most of times , invade a new kingdom and kill all that have live in the first city to made all the other not resist appear be an excelent tatic , for that age of course , today we have "moral" and "Human rights" so it is indeed a monster acts today.

Ofcourse i see he indeed sometimes made "extreme" acts that are not in need , like tell to soldiers cut off the ear of all dead enemies to he know how many he killed.

Talk about barbarian word , you know that in realy most of the conqueror are in FACT all barbarians because the real mean of the word is "people who dont talk my linguage or talk strange linguage" just that not mean be brutal or with no manners.
Knowledge is achieved with time, but Intelligence is born with it or without it. - Mestre Will
User avatar
Mestre Will
Scholar of Shen Zhou
Posts: 856
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 5:40 pm
Location: Starting to pratice Cuju with Kong Gui

Re: Ghengis Khan: Barbarian Monster, or Glorious Emperor?

Unread postby WeiWenDi » Sat Sep 08, 2012 12:01 am

Mestre Will wrote:I personally see him as the great conqueror , that is all. No matter if he did kill people or not , the idea of conquest without killing is hard to made expecialy when most of the other kingdoms see you as "Barbarian".

Well, that's sort of... not true. Cyrus' conquest of Babylon was bloodless or nearly so, and at that time most people (including their kissing-cousins and longtime rivals, the Medes) considered the Persians to be filthy, uncultured nomads. For the most part, he did it through a cunning PR campaign which involved a great deal of appeal to the religious traditions of the people in his newly-conquered lands. As a matter of fact, one may indeed claim that Cyrus invented the concepts of human rights and universally-applicable morality, 1700 years before the rapines of Jyngghis Khan.

Jyngghis Khan's situation may have been quite different, though I'm not entirely sure. Eventually, the Medes became proud to call themselves 'Persian' and integrated well into their empire. So did a number of other subject peoples (including the Babylonians, the Jews and the Egyptians). The people who came under Mongol rule resented it bitterly. Russian historiographers grumble about the 'Tatar yoke'. The Chinese attitude toward the Yuans is... mercurial. When they aren't out trying to claim that Genghis Khan was Chinese, they viewed the Mongol rein with a fair bit of outrage. Confucian historiographers in particular were not kind to the Yuans, particularly as Confucian scholars were designated as the 臭老九 ('Stinking Old Ninth', the ninth social caste - below prostitutes and above beggars) by the Yuan monarchs.

He is, of course, more highly regarded amongst the Mongols themselves. And also (interestingly enough) amongst Kazakhs, Kirghiz, Uzbeks and Uyghurs, who trace certain bloodlines back to Genghis Khan - particularly that of Janybek and Abylai Khan (themselves great rulers of the Kazakhs).

Personally, though, my opinion of Jyngghis Khan (and the Yuan Dynasty) isn't particularly high. He is often hailed as a religiously tolerant, 'enlightened' overlord, but the rapine he visited upon the common people in the great cities of Samarqand, Baghdad and Kiev are inexcusable by any standard the civilised world has held, ever.
Some more blood, Chekov. The needle won't hurt, Chekov. Take off your shirt, Chekov. Roll over, Chekov. Breathe deeply, Chekov. Blood sample, Chekov! Marrow sample, Chekov! Skin sample, Chekov! If I live long enough... I'm going to run out of samples.
User avatar
Hedgehog Emperor
Posts: 3855
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 12:09 am
Location: L'Étoile du Nord

Re: Ghengis Khan: Barbarian Monster, or Glorious Emperor?

Unread postby Jordan » Mon Nov 12, 2012 4:21 pm

The Mongol conquests were great to anybody they didn't conquer, like Western Europeans. Otherwise they were horrendous and set some regions of the world back permanently. Watershed moment in world history where all of Asia was devastated while Europeans benefited from the renewed trade along the Silk Road, and the taste for that trade, which the Mongols brought. In the end I lean toward the column A category, but I'd call him a mass murderer and rapist instead.
User avatar
Scholar of Shen Zhou
Posts: 5934
Joined: Thu Dec 02, 2004 4:52 am

Re: Ghengis Khan: Barbarian Monster, or Glorious Emperor?

Unread postby Tian Shan » Fri Apr 05, 2013 6:41 am

Soo much to say, so little time. Should probably wait till I can make a nice case but who knows when that would be.

If Genghis Khan is a barbarian monster than Any warlord of today or yesterday is. Because WAR IS BARBARIC.
However a few points
I speak for Genghis Khan himself, not his subsequent generations..
-History written by the victors? All the history of Ghengis khan we know is actually from the conquered. Even "The secret history of the Mongols' the most popular book for that era history was written by a Chinese
-People always like to make the enemy seem eviler than they are, so the warriors fight more easily.
-But in fairness you should never judge something from one source because so many things are adulterated. And today historians are trying to do character assassination for every great person in history, making up scandals etc...
-Temugen did great things for the people of the step by uniting the tribes and made strict law and penal code. Made abducting women illegal. He sought to unite people not divide them
- He was religiously tolerant
- His war waging saw actually a minimum blood shed as possible with shock and awe tactics, intimidating people to surrender rather than fight
- Mongols raided China, because Mongolia is difficult place to live and hard place to grow things. China superiority did not want to trade with outsiders so Mongols were left with little choice. (Its the same mentality that lead to the opium wars of 1900's, they did not want to trade with outsiders)
- Ghenghis Khan was a loving family man, a devote spiritualist, generous leader, and an astute commander. Few men can compare...
-His empire united east and west thoughts and people and secured the silk road improving trade and the flow of ideas.
“If intelligence is defined as the ability to understand, learn and reason then Mankind is the least intelligent species on this planet . Abusing and destroying nature and other creatures is destroying themselves.-"

"Peace be with you."
User avatar
Tian Shan
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Oct 04, 2012 6:44 pm
Location: Montreal, Canada


Return to World History Deliberation

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

Copyright © 2002–2008 Kongming’s Archives. All Rights Reserved