Hacker News Reader

Comment by vaidhy | Hacker News Reader

I have no idea why you are getting downvoted. Maybe people do not want to know the truth?

You are absolutely right in this. Genghis Khan was not only a conqueror, but also an efficient administrator. The various khanates across central asia were a result of mongol invasion. In most of the ancient world, conquest also meant integration with local population. It is not an superior race ruling over inferiors.

On the other hand, what knowledge did european conqueror save? We have all the lost civilization, primarily because europeans did not care to save anything that is not christian.

View on HN

I'm trying to follow, but having a hard time. The Mongols were NOT brutal and they WERE great administrators? So why was their reign so short?

It was a family dynasty, the core lasted 160 odd years until the third generation definitively split into smaller family groupings, one of which lasted as a state until 1680 or so .. giving the "family as rulers" a lifespan of some 480 years.

That appears to be their argument.

Mine would be that the Mongols were brutal and efficient administrators. Killing 50 million people and being a good administrator are orthogonal concepts.

Reading through the Wikipedia article, you can also find references to the Mongols engaging in deliberate cultural destruction, including the massive wastage of books, and targeted religious persecution. I am not sure where the Mongol revisionism comes from but it is surprising to me.

The original point is that europeans were not great at embracing the culture of the people they ruled over, contrary to what Yuval says. He contrasts mongols with european conquests and in my mind, they were the same.

Could you explain some more about how they were good administrators? I always had the impression that they were good conquerors but bad administrators. They'd conquer you then leave you alone as long as you paid your taxes.

If you tell me that the Romans or Persians were good administrators, that makes sense. We know they implemented laws, tax systems, roads, construction projects, etc. Do we have evidence that the Mongols did the same and did it as effectively?

I never said they were not brutal. I specifically Genghis Khan was a great administrator, nothing about him not being brutal. In my mind, they are orthogonal.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com