Daniel Turek

Mongol Aggression Debate

Andrews 21 Nov 2012

 

According to Ways of the World author Robert Strayer, Mongols left an “indelible” mark on “the agricultural civilizations with which they so often interacted.” (Strayer p334) That is certainly true- one could say that the indelible mark was more of a deep wound of terror, violence, slavery, and suffering for those who were “interacted” with by the Mongols. Strayer begins the chapter with a little background on the Mongols, and no one can deny that they had a keen sense of the usefulness of technology in combat. Also, mobility – captured technology led to new innovations, these “innovations included complex horse harnesses, saddles with iron stirrups, a small compound bow that could be fired from horseback, various forms of armor, and new kinds of swords.” (p337-338) By the time Mongols started mounted warfare from the backs of horses and camels, they had figured something out that would reverberate through history – speed and distance win in military combat. By being faster, taller, and more in control than their opponents, the Mongols had all the key advantages. In this way, they exploited their power for gain in the lands surrounding their starting point. This exploitation of power alone dooms the Mongols to a place in history right there with the Nazis and Stalin’s Communist Russia. Any powerful empire that chooses to beat down their neighbors must be considered savage by history.

   However these savages changed the course of history, one must admit that they made history, and so should be recognized as such. But in a debate about whether or not the Mongols got a “bad rap” by historians, I cannot imagine how even the early scribes of those times would have made so much about the Mongols if it was not true. Why would anyone want to make up a story about how their homeland was conquered, their women and children enslaved, and their way of life destroyed? No, the Mongols were most likely exactly as described. Mongols left what Strayer describes as a “surprisingly modest cultural imprint on the world it had briefly governed.” (p342) This is not surprising really when one considers the fact that the Mongols had a very simple and, actually, meaningless culture in their empire. In fact, the main goal of the Mongols was to ride over the next dune and conquer and/or kill whoever might be living there. That is not a culture – it is simply a self-serving, cold-blooded way for a people to live. It is actually the antithesis of the adage, “live and let live.” Strayer points out the summarizing point of the whole driving ideal of the Mongols: “Each fresh victory brought new resources for making war and new threats or insecurities that seems to require further expansion.” (p345) That is all they had – like so many termites or locusts, which have only the need to exploit every natural resource so that they may spread everywhere to consume absolutely everything, the Mongols were the same. No, it is not an understatement to say that their bad rap was deserved.