[dead]
The Mongol Khans of Medieval France
21–30 of 85 posts
Re: The Mongol Khans of Medieval France
#22What's also interesting about the mongols and their inheritors (India's mughals especially) was how weird but effective their administration was. India knew around no global famines and very few local ones (none around the Bengal) in ~300 years of Mughal rule. In ~100 years of British rule, you had regular famines all around India, and some very harsh ones where millions of people died from hunger (which used to be m…
There were several great famines during the Mughal reign in India, for example, Peter Mundy, the English merchant and traveller, describes the great famine of Deccan and Gujrat. The Mughal rule was brutal. The European travellers have written about the plight of the farmers who rebelled due to excessive taxation despite the fear of punishment. The Mughals built towers of severed heads outside each village and even they were not able to quell the rebellion, such was the state of affairs. So I'd say the assumption you're making isn't true.
Re: The Mongol Khans of Medieval France
#23"The kings of medieval France were fascinated by the Mongols, who they saw as great empire builders."
Well, surprising, as they were supporting military actions against Mongols, plus medieval France was nothing like Mongols empire in terms of social live organization, way of fighting wars (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peace_and_Truce_of_God).
Later, in XV century, France started to turn into Mongols-like regime, but those weren't medieval times.
Re: The Mongol Khans of Medieval France
#24What's also interesting about the mongols and their inheritors (India's mughals especially) was how weird but effective their administration was. India knew around no global famines and very few local ones (none around the Bengal) in ~300 years of Mughal rule. In ~100 years of British rule, you had regular famines all around India, and some very harsh ones where millions of people died from hunger (which used to be m…
There were several great famines during the Mughal reign in India, for example, Peter Mundy, the English merchant and traveller, describes the great famine of Deccan and Gujrat. The Mughal rule was brutal. The European travellers have written about the plight of the farmers who rebelled due to excessive taxation despite the fear of punishment. The Mughals built towers of severed heads outside each village and even th…
Mughal rule in India was very inconsistent depending on the ruler in power at the time. There was a huge variety in quality of governance from Akbar to Aurangzeb.
Re: The Mongol Khans of Medieval France
#25I honestly had no idea about the French fascination with the Mongols. People tend to admire people who have traits they aspire to. I wonder if this stems from France, being a major imperial power at the time, admiring the Mongols as an imperial power. This timeline coincides with the Crusades with, which the article talks about at length. I find the Crusades fascinating because they've shaped the modern world in so m…
France was not a major imperial power at the time. It was much smaller than today, lacking Savoy and much of Burgundy for start, with Normandy and many other areas only nominally part of it and technically under control of English king (who was just a duke in France, but that changed only a very little on the battlefield). Crusades in middle east started as an attempt of Eastern Roman empire (although they just calle…
> under control of English king (who was just a duke in France,
I thought the folks in Normandy were just Nordic people who moved there and later to England
Re: The Mongol Khans of Medieval France
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
I still get weird looks when I rave about 8 hours of podcasts on the Mongols. Hard to appreciate without having heard it. Dan Carlin is exceptional. Here’s the first episode on Spotify https://open.spotify.com/episode/5wuQ7JPneMRJTU9UJrJRNs?si=6... And link to buy for those who prefer that over streaming https://www.dancarlin.com/product/hardcore-history-wrath-of-...
I have turned at least one friend onto history podcasts using Mike Duncan's work. Now our wives look at us like we're a bunch of two headed goats whenever we meet and talk referncing revolutionary figures and events, raving about how much more "you feel the history" when visiting Rome and Paris and know some of the history. It's great!
I just finished carlins kings of kings episodes before visiting the british museum. Carlin mentioned the contrast between what was depicted in the Assyrian and Achaemenid empires palace/throne and being able to see it in the museum with the added context made me appreciate it so much more.
Visited Rome/Pompeii with my GF and she said it was like having a private tour guide. I just felt like I knew so little and could only add sparse bits of context.
Re: The Mongol Khans of Medieval France
#27For some reason, the website is down for me. I have always been fascinated by the Mongols after reading “Genghis Khan and the Making of the Modern World” by Jack Weatherford. Recently, I stumbled upon the 6:40+ hour YouTube video, “The Mongols - Terror of the Steppe.” You might like it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdFwMDuAnS4
Goodreads reviews don't instill confidence in the book.
Re: The Mongol Khans of Medieval France
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
France was not a major imperial power at the time. It was much smaller than today, lacking Savoy and much of Burgundy for start, with Normandy and many other areas only nominally part of it and technically under control of English king (who was just a duke in France, but that changed only a very little on the battlefield). Crusades in middle east started as an attempt of Eastern Roman empire (although they just calle…
> under control of English king (who was just a duke in France, I thought the folks in Normandy were just Nordic people who moved there and later to England
yes, but when they moved to England, the Normand duke made himself king of England, so he (and his heirs) had the crown of England and the ducky of Normandy.
Re: The Mongol Khans of Medieval France
#29What's also interesting about the mongols and their inheritors (India's mughals especially) was how weird but effective their administration was. India knew around no global famines and very few local ones (none around the Bengal) in ~300 years of Mughal rule. In ~100 years of British rule, you had regular famines all around India, and some very harsh ones where millions of people died from hunger (which used to be m…
Western colonialism is a very high bar in terms of damage imo. This subject really interesting to read, thank you for mentioning it! Found this in case anyone is interested in reading about it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Famine_in_India
I worry Colonialism will come back again. Or at least in a different form.
Most International Relations practitioners are followers of (Systems) Realism. You might find some minor power with Idealists/Instituitonalists, but they only get that privilege by being under the umbrella of a great power.
Colonialism was not some greedy merchant/state thing, it was an Arms Race. It follows the inevitable forces produced by anarchy, there are no police to call so power is the greatest form of security. It causes a Tragedy of the Commons situation in the form of an Arms Race.
After Colonialism, we had essentially client states, which seems similarly brutal.
Re: The Mongol Khans of Medieval France
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
France was not a major imperial power at the time. It was much smaller than today, lacking Savoy and much of Burgundy for start, with Normandy and many other areas only nominally part of it and technically under control of English king (who was just a duke in France, but that changed only a very little on the battlefield). Crusades in middle east started as an attempt of Eastern Roman empire (although they just calle…
> under control of English king (who was just a duke in France, I thought the folks in Normandy were just Nordic people who moved there and later to England
Its a mess. Vikings (mostly danes) did "move" there by conquering and being given lands as bribes. William conquered England but was still a vassal to the king of France due to still being the Duke of Normandy. So for example when France got a new king the king of England would need to go and swear loyalty and such, which would become a problem later.
Through marriages and such the Duke of Normandy took over large parts of France and it became the Angevin Empire, but still just a puny vassal to the King of France.
The 100 year war was fought over this essentially and England would end up losing all French land and thus the problem was solved forever.