...In the article, The Mongals: how barbaric do you think the Barbarians were? During the 13th century a small tribe from the grasslands or steppes of Central Asia conquered much of the known world. The Barbarians lived beyond the reach of civilization and they were also savage. Mongols had their brutal side. The Barbarians send a detachment of captives and mean of other nationalities who are fighting with them to meet the enemy head on, and some of the Tartars may perhaps accompany them (DOC 3). They make a strong attack with engines and arrows and they do not leave off fighting by day or night. Sometimes the barbarians would take the fat of the people they kill and, melting it, throw in on to the houses. The mongols now descended from the...
Words: 323 - Pages: 2
...Assignment 3: Cultural Activity Report By: Christina Ackerman Dr. James Allen Humanities 1 June 14, 2015 I was lucky to be chosen as a chaperone for my youngest son’s fourth grade field trip. The trip was on Friday May fifteenth and we spent three hours at the Franklin Institute in Philadelphia PA after visiting the Liberty Bell. Out trip attendees consisted of one hundred ten year olds and twenty adults as guides and chaperones. We were transported from the school in four large buses which included a bathroom and DVD players to the children’s delight. It took us about forty five minutes to go from the school in Bethlehem to the museum in Philadelphia. Each chaperone was in charge of five children and upon entering the museum you are first greeted by a huge atrium in which a monstrous size Benjamin Franklin sits on a large chair. One of the first things noticed by the children as well as myself was the intricate decorations not only in the large atrium but also on the outside of the building before even entering the museum. I was at first very intimated and one of the children in my group upon entering the museum realized his water in his bag had spilled everywhere creating a large puddle that was now spilling onto the floor of the museum. The Franklin Institute is filled with several amazing interactive displays including the giant heart, your brain, and changing earth to name a few of our favorites. I personally had my eyes set on the third floor which housed the...
Words: 702 - Pages: 3
...Genghis Khan had an extremely strong following. Equivalently, Alexander the Great could convince anyone to follow him within the blink of an eye. He was adored so greatly by his people. In fact, Egyptians admired him so much that they crowned him their Pharaoh, or their god. Both Genghis Khan and Alexander the Great were able to gain land and following, and kept it that way for many years. Genghis Khan and Alexander face many great challenges throughout their leaderships, including their battles to get there. Genghis Khan knew the only way for him to avenge his father and rise to power, was to defeat each one of his enemies. Chopping them down one by one, Genghis finally reached the top. He “accepted” the title of ultimate ruler of the Mongols. Similarly, Alexander the Great wanted to avenge Greece or Macedon along with his rise to power. Alexander the Great was the only one person who could defeat the Persian army, one of the greatest armies of Alexander’s time. He was victorious in every battle, until he faced India who defeated him altogether. Khan and Alexander swiftly made their way up to the top. They destroyed the odds stack against them, and came out on top. One of the most apparent reasons Alexander the Great is recognized for being a great leader is how much he spread trade and culture, but shockingly so did Khan. Genghis Khan created and strengthened trade and diplomatic links between China, India, Europe, and the Middle East. He also opened many roads along the Silk...
Words: 715 - Pages: 3
...place to place to find the supplies they needed to survive. Later, the Mongols became an enormous stationary empire, lasting from 1206-1368. Most of their men and some women became a part of their military which is known as ferocious and powerful, and their violent ways of conquering people and seizing land are infamous to the world today. In their short time of being an Empire, they captured 4,860,000 square miles of land according to Size of World Conquests chart (Doc 1), which is over one million more square miles then the US owns today. Because the Mongol Empire was so massive, in order to be a successful, they needed to...
Words: 1373 - Pages: 6
...Epic Hero The Hero of the epic would definitely be Chingis Khan aka Genghis Khan because he was the one who united all of the nomadic tribes into the great Mongol Empire. However, he did it with great cunningness and cleverness by betraying his close enemies and manipulating his friends. Since Temujin was his birth given name Genghis Khan (universal ruler) would be his greatest epithet along with many other titles as he conquered other enemy tribes. He embodies Mongolian cultural values such as extreme loyalty to one’s family. For example his main priority is his family’s well being just like when he announces Ogodei as his successor for when he dies. In addition, he is extremely strong, courageous, and unmerciful when facing enemy tribes during battles. He would executed all the male captives and give the women and children to the nobility as slaves and servants. Sensational Descriptions “When Temujin came back to the camp he ordered that the nobles of the Chinos clan be boiled alive in seventy iron kettles. Then he cut off the head of their chief, Chaghagan Uua, tied it to the tail of his horse, and dragged it behind him. I like this passage because it shows how the Mongols were very cruel and heartless towards near by tribes. It’s hard to believe that they were daring enough to do such a thing without any conscious thoughts they think will haunt them later on. Comparison to Gilgamesh • Comitatus Theme- During certain moments of Genghis Khan’s rise to power, he befriends...
Words: 667 - Pages: 3
...established the giant Mongol empire just from a humble starting. As such, together with his descendants, he constructed the biggest historic empire that ran the whole of Asian landform from the Pacific Ocean to today’s Hungary within Europe. Astonishingly, his empire is invariably linked with the dreadful narratives of bloodshed, destruction, and conquest. Undeniably, such a kingdom could not have been created without enhanced organizational skills, a superb archers’ army, visionary leadership, the quickest and most resilient horse soldiers, the presence of politically destabilized nations across Asia, and, obviously,...
Words: 614 - Pages: 3
...The Mongol Empire, different groups tribes from the plains of central Asia, expanded across Eurasia. Was one of the strongest empires from 1258 to 1368. Military strength was the primary causation factor that strengthened the Mongol Empire by a structure of the military, efficient use of limited amount of food, and usage of horses and weapons. The Mongol Empire was a very good example for the rest of the world, either about a good idea to adopt or be cautioned about. First, the structure of military of Mongols was exemplary, it had a structure that allowed, all troops be connected with the ruler during attacks and daily day. According to Columbia University database, “[Chinggis Khan]...He organized his people into units of ten, a hundred, a thousand, and ten thousand, and the head of an unit of ten thousand would have strong personal relationship with Chinggis, himself.”(Mongols).When...
Words: 668 - Pages: 3
...Barbaric were the Barbarians? In history, the world has faced with war with people going against with each other but, was there a popular group who caused this catastrophe? In matter of fact there was, the Mongols. The Mongols, a nomadic tribe, who followed their leader, Temuchin or known as Genghis Khan, swept country after country to get their ways with savage and cruel demolition. The word ‘barbaric’ is defined to be, “savagely cruel;exceedingly brutal” which in this case, fits to the Barbarians. Due to the influence from Genghis Khan to his tribe causing destruction, here are reasons why the Barbarians were Barbaric. The influence of Genghis Khan started the Mongols to have savage acts. As a kid, Khan was a fighter after the death of his parents and fought for leadership in the Mongol clan then becoming a leader. Khan’s first attempt of invasion were the Chinese enemies. As it says on the Background Document, “Numerous Chinese cities felt Mongol brutality. Slaughter was so great that the streets of the Chinese capital were greasy with human fat and flesh.” This proves that Genghis Khan’s movement were brutal, even in his first target wipe out the city. Despite that the Chinese capital was swept away, even his actions...
Words: 637 - Pages: 3
...the Barbarians? For hundreds and hundreds of years, the Mongols were the rulers of China and most of Asia. As the empire grew, the Mongols became more and more vicious in their attacks. The Mongols were very barbaric in most, if not all, of their efforts for conquering cities and war. They were barbaric in three main ways, in their way of warfare, how Genghis Khan controlled his army, and how they governed their empire. One way the Mongols were barbaric was the way in which they fought in warfare. When Genghis Khan first started conquering Asia, he was as brutal as ever. According to the article, The Mongols: How Barbaric Were the “Barbarians”?, some of the cities in China even said that the slaughter was so great that they saw “the streets of the Chinese capital were greasy with human fat and flesh.” This must mean that this specific battle brought death upon many of the people in China. Also, if the Mongols are in a battle in hopes of conquering the city and they end up failing, they use another method where they throw Greek fire (napalm) and use the...
Words: 661 - Pages: 3
...strategies that he used was integrating the conquered people in with his own people. (Ratchnevsky 100) Khan’s first major goal was to reunite all Mongols under one rule. Khan conquered his rival tribes first. They were the Naiman, Kereit, Merkit, and the Tatar tribe. (Morgan 71) He did not take their land and force the people to live elsewhere; he put them under his protection and offered people great wealth if they followed him. Another political accomplishment of Khan was that he decided he was not going to appoint his army generals because of family ties. (history.com 3) He was going to give titles to the people who deserved them and followed his rule. Khan made it clear that his authority was going to rule over everyone else in the Mongol Empire. Khan did not rule as a dictator; he appointed staff to set policies. The policies usually addressed issues such as war and peace; He had one hural, who was second in command under Khan, also had a say in policies for the empire. Khan had the final say in what policies were created by his staff. Along with Khan’s strict authority over his new land, he forced all the people to speak the same language. He wanted one nation and one language so that there were not any barriers between the people. (Morgan 103) The Naiman tribe ruled the Mongol area before the Mongols were there, so the set language was Uighur. He had one of his captives modify the Uighur script to fit the Mongolian language. The sounds were adapted...
Words: 1197 - Pages: 5
...He first set out to destroy traditional divisions among the various tribes. Temujin used outstanding military tactics along with merciless brutality. His first major conquest came when he avenged his father's death by decimating the tatars tribe, and ordered the killing of every tatar male above three feet tall. The mongols then defeated the taichiuts using a series of massive cavalry attacks, along with their well known merciless brutality. They then had all of the taichiut chiefs boiled alive. Then in 1206, Temujins army then defeated the powerful naimain tribe, thus giving him control of central and eastern...
Words: 620 - Pages: 3
...would become the largest contiguous empire in history. Genghis Khan’s leadership style was a controversial and novel method for the time period. Before the Great Khan very few if any historical leaders based positions of power on merit instead of nobility or family connections. Genghis Khan’s leadership style closely resembles a paternalistic leadership style. This leadership style has the leader treating members of the team almost as his or her children. The leader then expects complete loyalty and dedication to whatever the leader deems as the next task to accomplish. Genghis Khan’s leadership style shares many aspects with this in the way he treated all of his subjects as family, as long as they submitted to him and remained loyal to the Mongol empire. Genghis Khan’s leadership style revolved almost entirely around a person’s ability and loyalty. In other words, the person who was the most capable was the person who received the position. Genghis Khan was so dedicated to this ideology that he would even shun his on family members and choose outsiders for high level positions, which was extremely uncommon during this time period. This shunning of family...
Words: 470 - Pages: 2
...Another difference is in the view some of the sources had of the Mongols. The Chronicle of Novgorod, written in 1238 in Russia, depicts the Mongols as barbarians. The Mongols are stated to be godless, like locusts, and portrays their barbaric nature in the fact that they slew everyone that was hiding in a church from their attack. This is very different from the view in The Epitaph for the Honorable Menggu, which was written in 1274 by the Chinese in China. In Epitaph for the Honorable Menggu, Menggu is said to be a just governor who showed mercy to people. In part of the source, it states that when people rebelled he helped convince the prince to pardon the people and only kill the leaders. This is a very different view of the Mongols and sounds nothing like the ones in The Chronicle of Novgorod....
Words: 642 - Pages: 3
...During the 13th century, a small tribe from the grasslands of Asia conquered much of the world. The mongols lived in moveable houses called yurts and knew little about mining, though they didn’t care for farming. Their reputation is not well among others. The mongols were very barbaric because they continually conquered a lot of land, killed people in large amounts, and treated prisoners poorly. To start off, the mongols were barbaric because they conquered a large amount of land. According to document 1, conqueror Genghis Khan (1162-1227) conquered the most land of 4,860,000 square miles. That’s bigger than the size of the United States. Following that, another large amount of land that was conquered was 2,180,000 square miles by conqueror...
Words: 320 - Pages: 2
...What would have happened if in 1241, the Mongols had gone thru with their planned attack of the European Continent? Would the New World be discovered sooner? What would the aftermath be like? What kind of worldly impact could it have? The Mongols had an expansive empire before 1241, having conquered from North China, to Southern Asia, all the way to the Middle East, with their leader Genghis Khan. Genghis Khan ended up having a son named Ogodei who would also expand the Mongol Empire. With the guidance of Ogodei the Mongols began to In 1241 the Mongols were plotting to take over the European Continent. It was coming down to the last couple days before they began their invasion, when Ogodei died. The invasion was canceled and the Mongols returned to Asia to take Ogodei...
Words: 633 - Pages: 3
