Genghis Khan And The Making Of The Modern World Analysis
MaryKate Chorazak
World Civilizations I
Professor Coleman
April 3, 2015
Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World The Mongol empire was larger than any empire of its time, covering an area almost as large as Africa. Despite this fact, its people were generally known as brutal savages who lived to destroy civilizations. However, Jack Weatherford believes otherwise. He recognizes Mongolia’s leader, Genghis Khan, as a highly influential ruler instead of a blood-thirsty barbarian. In fact, Weatherford attributes many aspects of the Renaissance and European culture in general to Genghis Khan’s rule. In his best-seller, Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World, Weatherford describes not only the history of this great Mongolian ruler, …show more content…
but the history of the world itself.
Weatherford believes that some elements of today’s society would not have been possible without the existence of Genghis Khan.
In the introduction he states, "The new technology, knowledge, and commercial wealth created the Renaissance in which Europe rediscovered some of its prior culture, but more importantly, absorbed the technology for printing, firearms, the compass, and the abacus from the East" (Weatherford XXIV). In other words, he believes that the technology required for creations such as the compass and printing press would not have existed without help from the Mongolians, Genghis Khan in particular. He explains that the Mongolians are primarily responsible for the spread of this technology because of advanced trade routes that they established as they conquered civilizations. These advanced roads also lead to the migration of people, ideas, or negative events such as the Black Plague. Though he makes a clear point about these accomplishments throughout the book, Weatherford recognizes the Mongolian Empire for much …show more content…
more.
Aside from spreading technology, Weatherford believed that Genghis Khan’s reign was responsible for the rise of progressive movements. This is mainly because Mongols surprisingly deviated from some standard methods of that time. One such method is the practice of torture. Most rulers of his time were known for publicly maiming and torturing in order to instill terror in their enemies and control their own people. Genghis Khan, on the other hand, did not believe in these methods, and instead used the speed and efficiency of his army to inspire fear (Weatherford 116). Additionally, Weatherford claims that the Mongols are responsible for other progressive principles. “The common principles of the Mongol Empire-such as paper money, primacy of the state over the church, freedom of religion, diplomatic immunity, and international law- were ideas that gained new importance” (Weatherford 236). The spread of the Mongolian empire simply aided in the spread of these progressive principles. Overall, Genghis Khan and his decedents were more advanced when it came to progressive values and basic human rights.
I believe that Jack Weatherford is very passionate about the Mongolian culture, as it is seen throughout his book.
However, I’m not sure whether or not these opinions he states come from fact or passion itself. Though it is clear that most of his beliefs can be proven, such as the size and strength of the Mongolian Empire, I still question this empire’s true significance. For instance, Weatherford argues that the Renaissance was caused by the Mongolian’s mixture of different cultures throughout Europe. He states “…Europeans experienced a Renaissance, literally a rebirth, but it was not the ancient world of Greece and Rome being reborn: It was the Mongol Empire, picked up, transferred, and adapted by the Europeans to their own needs and culture (Weatherford 237).” How can he really attribute this significant era of time to one specific group of people? It is likely that even without the help of the Mongols, European and Asian civilizations were bound to share ideas and culture. If anything, the Mongol Empire may have just sped up this process. Though, this will never be known for
sure.
The Mongol Empire was one of the largest and strongest in history. It can be said that this powerful empire is responsible for feats such as the Renaissance and the world trade market. In Jack Weatherford’s Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World, the Mongolians are depicted in this progressive approach instead of their more common barbarian stereotype. He argues that they spread technology to make way for inventions such as paper money, the compass, and the printing press. In addition, Weatherford also attributes the Mongol Empire with progressive values such as the importance of state over church, freedom of religion, diplomatic immunity, and an international law. Through all of these examples, Jack Weatherford shapes the Mongol Empire’s reputation into an influential, advanced group of people who were more than just their barbaric stereotype.
Works Cited
Weatherford, J. McIver. Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World. New York: Crown, 2004. Print.
World Civilizations I
Professor Coleman
April 3, 2015
Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World The Mongol empire was larger than any empire of its time, covering an area almost as large as Africa. Despite this fact, its people were generally known as brutal savages who lived to destroy civilizations. However, Jack Weatherford believes otherwise. He recognizes Mongolia’s leader, Genghis Khan, as a highly influential ruler instead of a blood-thirsty barbarian. In fact, Weatherford attributes many aspects of the Renaissance and European culture in general to Genghis Khan’s rule. In his best-seller, Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World, Weatherford describes not only the history of this great Mongolian ruler, …show more content…
but the history of the world itself.
Weatherford believes that some elements of today’s society would not have been possible without the existence of Genghis Khan.
In the introduction he states, "The new technology, knowledge, and commercial wealth created the Renaissance in which Europe rediscovered some of its prior culture, but more importantly, absorbed the technology for printing, firearms, the compass, and the abacus from the East" (Weatherford XXIV). In other words, he believes that the technology required for creations such as the compass and printing press would not have existed without help from the Mongolians, Genghis Khan in particular. He explains that the Mongolians are primarily responsible for the spread of this technology because of advanced trade routes that they established as they conquered civilizations. These advanced roads also lead to the migration of people, ideas, or negative events such as the Black Plague. Though he makes a clear point about these accomplishments throughout the book, Weatherford recognizes the Mongolian Empire for much …show more content…
more.
Aside from spreading technology, Weatherford believed that Genghis Khan’s reign was responsible for the rise of progressive movements. This is mainly because Mongols surprisingly deviated from some standard methods of that time. One such method is the practice of torture. Most rulers of his time were known for publicly maiming and torturing in order to instill terror in their enemies and control their own people. Genghis Khan, on the other hand, did not believe in these methods, and instead used the speed and efficiency of his army to inspire fear (Weatherford 116). Additionally, Weatherford claims that the Mongols are responsible for other progressive principles. “The common principles of the Mongol Empire-such as paper money, primacy of the state over the church, freedom of religion, diplomatic immunity, and international law- were ideas that gained new importance” (Weatherford 236). The spread of the Mongolian empire simply aided in the spread of these progressive principles. Overall, Genghis Khan and his decedents were more advanced when it came to progressive values and basic human rights.
I believe that Jack Weatherford is very passionate about the Mongolian culture, as it is seen throughout his book.
However, I’m not sure whether or not these opinions he states come from fact or passion itself. Though it is clear that most of his beliefs can be proven, such as the size and strength of the Mongolian Empire, I still question this empire’s true significance. For instance, Weatherford argues that the Renaissance was caused by the Mongolian’s mixture of different cultures throughout Europe. He states “…Europeans experienced a Renaissance, literally a rebirth, but it was not the ancient world of Greece and Rome being reborn: It was the Mongol Empire, picked up, transferred, and adapted by the Europeans to their own needs and culture (Weatherford 237).” How can he really attribute this significant era of time to one specific group of people? It is likely that even without the help of the Mongols, European and Asian civilizations were bound to share ideas and culture. If anything, the Mongol Empire may have just sped up this process. Though, this will never be known for
sure.
The Mongol Empire was one of the largest and strongest in history. It can be said that this powerful empire is responsible for feats such as the Renaissance and the world trade market. In Jack Weatherford’s Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World, the Mongolians are depicted in this progressive approach instead of their more common barbarian stereotype. He argues that they spread technology to make way for inventions such as paper money, the compass, and the printing press. In addition, Weatherford also attributes the Mongol Empire with progressive values such as the importance of state over church, freedom of religion, diplomatic immunity, and an international law. Through all of these examples, Jack Weatherford shapes the Mongol Empire’s reputation into an influential, advanced group of people who were more than just their barbaric stereotype.
Works Cited
Weatherford, J. McIver. Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World. New York: Crown, 2004. Print.