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…
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…
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
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…
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…
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