Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Mongol Khans of Medieval France

historytoday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 85 posts

Re: The Mongol Khans of Medieval France

#31

Post by 999900000999 »

orwin wrote: post #6

What'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…

What's the saying, the Irish famine was caused by a parasite, known as the British.

Even if you can argue the British didn't deliberately cause famine over their subjects, they almost never took active steps to alleviate them.

Re: The Mongol Khans of Medieval France

#32

Post by mikkupikku »

piokoch wrote: post #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 regim…

Real recognizes Real.

Re: The Mongol Khans of Medieval France

#33

Post by forshaper »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #14
jmyeet wrote: post #2

I 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…

Why the Mongols? Because they were distant. You can't afford to admire the people next door; you're either fighting them or preparing for when fighting breaks out again.

The idea that you can't admire people you're fighting is ridiculous. You're forced to admire them. If you don't admire where they win, you lose.

Re: The Mongol Khans of Medieval France

#34

Post by soiltype »

wiseowise wrote: post #27
Brajeshwar wrote: post #3

For 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.

As a rule, "pop history" is full of shit and is probably better considered misinformation than anything else. I probably don't I know of a single general-audience history/anthropology book that doesn't horrify scholars of the field.

As unfortunate as it is, studying cause-and-effect is extremely complex. If it's even theoretically possible to distill it down to easily digestible ideas, that's well outside our current technical capabilities.

There's usually going to be some true and interesting information in these books, but it will be too deeply embedded in a narrative that is misleading.

Re: The Mongol Khans of Medieval France

#35

Post by brabel »

forshaper wrote: post #33
AnimalMuppet wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why the Mongols? Because they were distant. You can't afford to admire the people next door; you're either fighting them or preparing for when fighting breaks out again.

The idea that you can't admire people you're fighting is ridiculous. You're forced to admire them. If you don't admire where they win, you lose.

I disagree. It's very hard to admire a direct enemy, even if you can see their strengths, you'll rationalize them in your head as being the evil sort of strength, which comes not from virtue but from their total lack of morality or whatever you can conjure up. We see that everywhere in history and even in contemporary conflicts.

Re: The Mongol Khans of Medieval France

#36

Post by OkayPhysicist »

orwin wrote: post #6

What'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…

Famines are, with very few exceptions, politico-economic actions, often with intentional malice, rather than a complete inability to obtain enough food.

Re: The Mongol Khans of Medieval France

#37

Post by jmyeet »

gostsamo wrote: post #4
jmyeet wrote: post #2

I 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…

The arabs were broken into smaller kingdoms for a long time when it came to the XIII century. The Eastern Roman Empire had been in decline since the fall of Constantinople in 1204 and even before that it was only a regional power. Compared to those, the mongols managed to build an empire spreading on millions of square kilometers. There is no base for comparison. It is like comparing the UK and the US 20 years after…

So this is a fallacy of seeing historical events through a modern lens.

We know how far the Mongols spread and we have accurate maps but in no way am I convinced that France could possibly conceive of the size and scope of Central Asia in the 11th century.

Re: The Mongol Khans of Medieval France

#38

Post by skissane »

999900000999 wrote: post #31
orwin wrote: post #6

What'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…

What's the saying, the Irish famine was caused by a parasite, known as the British. Even if you can argue the British didn't deliberately cause famine over their subjects, they almost never took active steps to alleviate them.

> Even if you can argue the British didn't deliberately cause famine over their subjects, they almost never took active steps to alleviate them.

They sent Protestant missionaries with free food for kids (souperism). Private charities, but the government used them as an excuse to not provide more government aid.

And a lot of Catholic parents decided they’d rather their children be dead than risk them becoming Protestant.

Re: The Mongol Khans of Medieval France

#39

Post by jmyeet »

orwin wrote: post #6

What'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…

You’re so close to the point but not quite there.

Famines are political. They happen because one population is happy to starve another. The Mughals ruled themselves. The British stole harvests for themselves and let the local population starve.

The potato famine in Ireland is treated as some kind of unavoidable, natural event. No, the British just stole the harvest. And this continued right up until Churchill in India.

So the Mughals might’ve been effective but the big difference is they weren’t being exploited as an imperial subject.

Re: The Mongol Khans of Medieval France

#40

Post by RealityVoid »

ecshafer wrote: post #19
vm wrote: post #17

Earlier 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-...

Dan Carlin has a great radio voice, and is an entertaining presenter. Hardcore history is really only okay on the history front though. Plus they are relatively shallow with how short they are.

I think this is a fair take but it works great as a gateway drug!

I am curious what are your recommendations though. Always eager for expanding my horizon.

Post reply on HN