It's official: Mali is in as a civ. -snicker-
- Thread starter Dearmad
- Start date
Black Powder was gradually improved from the 10th century all the way till the 18th century; there is no sudden leap except for the initial discovery in China, supposedly by a cook.
The gunpowder was first used for rockets and cannons (it is a fable that China only used it for fireworks); the Mongols brought it to Europe in the 13th century.
The gunpowder was first used for rockets and cannons (it is a fable that China only used it for fireworks); the Mongols brought it to Europe in the 13th century.
Gabryel Karolin said:
yes, I find it flat out absurd; the germans never had, and never woudl have ever coem close to creatign nay sort of a stable political entity which woudl lead to any sort of future claims for land beign german up to the ukrain, even if the mongols had never existed, period, end of argument. the existing powers of Polan, Lithuania, and Russia ALL coudl have counter German agression, and moreover, they DID counter Germanic based aggression by the Teutonic knights into thier spheres of influence.
happy now?
Ivan the Kulak said:
1) the mongols invented nothing; Horse archers were estbalished as far back as the late rbonze/early iron age by the Assyrians, and step nimads seem to have already been quite adtapted to thier use as soon as they got thier hands on horses strogn enough to carry them into war.
2)wonderful, they had a good army; any indepth investiagtion will reveal that thier army was orginized, by coincidence, alogn the sam elines as the Roman army before it; the only thing the Mongols had going for them was that life on the steppes was as hard as it was, and was a natural trainer for full time soldires; everythign else was either luck, or common sense, with more then healthy dose of brilliance from less then common military leaders; and history fleshes this out; once the mongols had thier ocnquests, and settled down to rule, they fell apart, bit by bit, because after thier intial conquest, they had no edge.
3)if you call killing hundreds of thousands, runing entire country sides for hundreds of years (Iran, now a wasteland, was once rather verdant and green, until the mongol cam, and destroyed the earth works that lent to the land its arableness; without the channels, the land desertified.) and more then just killing and plundering (the fact that they didnt rape all the much is to thier credit I suppose; rather, they just outright killed) and then sat down, and adopted the culture of the conqoured peoples is culture? hardley. the fact that they merged themselves into the cultures they conqoured is more then conclusive that any Mongolian cuilture was only a result of thier prior way of life, and once under the influnce of a real civlization, they eagerlyl cast aisde thie rold ways to adopt the forms and functions of what was reveald to them.
Invisible Rhino
Prince
Wow. Why are so many people so eager to assume that a culture is worthless. May I suggest that you actually go out and read a few books instead of ranting and raving on an internet forum about something you know so little about.
The Mali had a profound influence on world history. To suggest that they don't belong in the game is ridiculous. Fortunately no one seems to take any argument against them seriously so I don't have to waste much space on them.
The Mongols had an even more profound effect on world history. Xen, you seem like a smart guy and I'm glad you are defending the Mali, but when it comes to the Mongols you don't know what you're talking about.
You are discussing the Mongols from the 12th century to the early 13th century. During this time they only first unified as a people, and their first noticeable act was an outward aggression against the Jin empire which had kept them fighting amongst themselves for so long.
During the course of conquering China, Central Asia, the Middle East, and Russia, they had a profound influence on the areas they touched. Allow me to give a few examples.
Siege Warfare was completely altered from China to the Middle East by the Mongols. They built more powerful siege engines than had ever existed by combining Middle Eastern and Chinese techniques, which had never been done before. True many of their engineers were not ethnic Mongols, but do we call the Atomic Bomb a German invention? I don't think so.
Alexander Nevsky came to power by being a stooge of the Mongols until he had the means to resist them. If you don't know who he is you shouldn't be arguing about historical influence.
Qubilai Qa'ans patronage of Buddhism gave the religion a significance in China that still exists today. Later Ming emperors were described as incarnations of Qubilai Qa'an in how they took his legacy of a secular Chinese emperor and a Tibetan lama working together. This was also a fundamental part of Ch'ing politics, thanks to the Mongols.
The Mongol influence on the world certianly didn't end with the Yuan. For example :
The Mongols after the fall of the Yuan produced Buddhist artists and writers whose works are still regarded highly today. The great artist Zanabazar for example.
Direct descendants of Chinggis Qa'an ruled Central Asia for five centuries. The Chinggisid principle was so important in that area that Timur (known to the west as Tamerlane) went to great lengths to fabricate a Mongol history.
The Manchu army was composed of a good number of Mongol troops. In fact in the Eight Banners system the Mongols had higher status than anyone except the Manchus. Many of these Mongols learned Chinese and played prominent roles in the Ch'ing Empire.
The Mongols were one of the five ethnic groups given status by Shianlong's Ch'ing Empire. His attempt to create a seperate but equal sort of state highly praised the Mongols culture and history. If they were good enough for Shianlong, they are good enough for me.
Babar, who founded the Mughal dynasty in India was of Mongolian descent. In fact he considered himself a failure in life for not retaking Central Asia, which was the land he was born to rule. Although I suspect anyone who thinks the Mongols aren't worthy of being a civilization feels the same way about the Indians.
The Mongols put the first named Dalai Lama in power. If you think that didn't influence history you are a fool.
The Mongols played a huge role in the schisms of Tibetan Buddhism, specifically the conversion of the Jibzumdumba Khutughu (spelled wrong) from Sa-skya Pa to Dge-lugs-pa was a huge event in the history of Tibetan Buddhism.
In short, if you want to learn about something go read a book or three. Don't sit around saying "I'm going to think this way until someone can prove me wrong" especially when what you want to learn about is history and the place you are waiting to be proved wrong about something is a computer game forum.
Almost all of the reasons people are giving for not including the Mongols I think would be more appropriately applied to the Germans, but that's a different subject.
The Mali had a profound influence on world history. To suggest that they don't belong in the game is ridiculous. Fortunately no one seems to take any argument against them seriously so I don't have to waste much space on them.
The Mongols had an even more profound effect on world history. Xen, you seem like a smart guy and I'm glad you are defending the Mali, but when it comes to the Mongols you don't know what you're talking about.
You are discussing the Mongols from the 12th century to the early 13th century. During this time they only first unified as a people, and their first noticeable act was an outward aggression against the Jin empire which had kept them fighting amongst themselves for so long.
During the course of conquering China, Central Asia, the Middle East, and Russia, they had a profound influence on the areas they touched. Allow me to give a few examples.
Siege Warfare was completely altered from China to the Middle East by the Mongols. They built more powerful siege engines than had ever existed by combining Middle Eastern and Chinese techniques, which had never been done before. True many of their engineers were not ethnic Mongols, but do we call the Atomic Bomb a German invention? I don't think so.
Alexander Nevsky came to power by being a stooge of the Mongols until he had the means to resist them. If you don't know who he is you shouldn't be arguing about historical influence.
Qubilai Qa'ans patronage of Buddhism gave the religion a significance in China that still exists today. Later Ming emperors were described as incarnations of Qubilai Qa'an in how they took his legacy of a secular Chinese emperor and a Tibetan lama working together. This was also a fundamental part of Ch'ing politics, thanks to the Mongols.
The Mongol influence on the world certianly didn't end with the Yuan. For example :
The Mongols after the fall of the Yuan produced Buddhist artists and writers whose works are still regarded highly today. The great artist Zanabazar for example.
Direct descendants of Chinggis Qa'an ruled Central Asia for five centuries. The Chinggisid principle was so important in that area that Timur (known to the west as Tamerlane) went to great lengths to fabricate a Mongol history.
The Manchu army was composed of a good number of Mongol troops. In fact in the Eight Banners system the Mongols had higher status than anyone except the Manchus. Many of these Mongols learned Chinese and played prominent roles in the Ch'ing Empire.
The Mongols were one of the five ethnic groups given status by Shianlong's Ch'ing Empire. His attempt to create a seperate but equal sort of state highly praised the Mongols culture and history. If they were good enough for Shianlong, they are good enough for me.
Babar, who founded the Mughal dynasty in India was of Mongolian descent. In fact he considered himself a failure in life for not retaking Central Asia, which was the land he was born to rule. Although I suspect anyone who thinks the Mongols aren't worthy of being a civilization feels the same way about the Indians.
The Mongols put the first named Dalai Lama in power. If you think that didn't influence history you are a fool.
The Mongols played a huge role in the schisms of Tibetan Buddhism, specifically the conversion of the Jibzumdumba Khutughu (spelled wrong) from Sa-skya Pa to Dge-lugs-pa was a huge event in the history of Tibetan Buddhism.
In short, if you want to learn about something go read a book or three. Don't sit around saying "I'm going to think this way until someone can prove me wrong" especially when what you want to learn about is history and the place you are waiting to be proved wrong about something is a computer game forum.
Almost all of the reasons people are giving for not including the Mongols I think would be more appropriately applied to the Germans, but that's a different subject.
Greek Stud
Prince
The Greeks invaded Cyprus??? That's funny, the United Nations has 100s of resolutions describing those people as Turks. And they still occupy Northern Cyprus, violating the Geneva Convention they have brought 120,000 colonists. My house is in Northern Cyprus, why the f*** cant I go to it? Because Greece invaded? You obviously dont know what youre talking about.
Invisible Rhino said:Wow. Why are so many people so eager to assume that a culture is worthless. May I suggest that you actually go out and read a few books instead of ranting and raving on an internet forum about something you know so little about....
In short, if you want to learn about something go read a book or three. Don't sit around saying "I'm going to think this way until someone can prove me wrong" especially when what you want to learn about is history and the place you are waiting to be proved wrong about something is a computer game forum.
Almost all of the reasons people are giving for not including the Mongols I think would be more appropriately applied to the Germans, but that's a different subject.
Didn't want to quote the whole thing and make it really long, but great argument.
VladTepes
Clown Prince of Wallachia
- Joined
- Jan 6, 2003
- Messages
- 478
Describing the Mongols as one civ is incorrect. To be accurate. you would have to have the Golden Horde, Chagatai Khanate, and the Timurids...but by having the Horde, a lot of Russian city names would be duplicated, and with the Timurids a lot of Persian names. Then of course those empires fell apart, and you had Kazan, Uzbek Khaganate, Crimea, restored Persia, the Moghuls, etc etc. Should the Malinese be included? There's no reason they shouldn't. There really should be a set of standards that Firaxis follows for determining if any civ should be included.
@Vlad Tepes; I'll concede the point of how much the mingol may have had influnece on world affairs; at least in regard ot Tibet(I had no idea of the Mongols influence in that particuler area, thank you for brinign it my attention , and the Rise of Russia(though one can very easilyl imagine a Russia far better off arsing if the Mongols had never swept in in the first place; but what ramifacatiosn such a development woudl have are profound)...
...but I still have yet to see nay proof of any technological benifit the mongols gave anyone, which seems to be the main point of argument for the mongols inclusion; it simpley didnt happen; and to be sure, I'm skepticle of how far you can stretch the definition of "mongol"; I've not a person whos very ethnicty based in regards to history, which most mongol arguments seem ot hinge on; culture is where its at, an its undeniable, most mongols readilly threw away thier own culture, and adopted local traditions whole sale; if you can call the result of that "mongol" isnt a view I agree with
, and the Rise of Russia(though one can very easilyl imagine a Russia far better off arsing if the Mongols had never swept in in the first place; but what ramifacatiosn such a development woudl have are profound)......but I still have yet to see nay proof of any technological benifit the mongols gave anyone, which seems to be the main point of argument for the mongols inclusion; it simpley didnt happen; and to be sure, I'm skepticle of how far you can stretch the definition of "mongol"; I've not a person whos very ethnicty based in regards to history, which most mongol arguments seem ot hinge on; culture is where its at, an its undeniable, most mongols readilly threw away thier own culture, and adopted local traditions whole sale; if you can call the result of that "mongol" isnt a view I agree with
jimkirk
Prince
you people are arguing like a bunch of mongolian half breed vulcans
if anything they shoulda include the hebrews or israelites after all 2 major religions spawned from them besides their own and they still exist today sorta spread all across the globe .. and there hasnt been a newspaper that doesnt liek to bash them in the headlines every now and then ..hey i would really very influential .. and of course numerous empires have tried to extinguish them .. yet the israelites/hebrews/jews or whatever u wanna call them still endure .. and those other empires are all gone or a shadow of their former selves
now what was soemoen complaining about barbaric hordes? oh ya that sounds like germany other than gas chambers what else did they produce? that influenced teh world ....
p.s. i am sure there will be expansions and deserving civs that were left out will be included in the expansions so lets not worry too much about which civs are in and which are out
(now i am sure i will get flamed so i am putting on soem fireproof coat)
if anything they shoulda include the hebrews or israelites after all 2 major religions spawned from them besides their own and they still exist today sorta spread all across the globe .. and there hasnt been a newspaper that doesnt liek to bash them in the headlines every now and then ..hey i would really very influential .. and of course numerous empires have tried to extinguish them .. yet the israelites/hebrews/jews or whatever u wanna call them still endure .. and those other empires are all gone or a shadow of their former selves
now what was soemoen complaining about barbaric hordes? oh ya that sounds like germany other than gas chambers what else did they produce? that influenced teh world ....
p.s. i am sure there will be expansions and deserving civs that were left out will be included in the expansions so lets not worry too much about which civs are in and which are out
(now i am sure i will get flamed so i am putting on soem fireproof coat)
Invisible Rhino
Prince
Xen said:
The same could be said of half the other civilizations in the game.
That's not the way I see it. The (sensible) argument for including the Mongols is their profound religous and political effect on the world.
Once again, this same argument applies to half the other civs much morseo than it does to the Mongols. There isn't even a "German" self-identity until VERY recently historically for example.
Completely and utterly wrong, as even the first attempt to learn history would have shown you. Mongols did not only hold on to their Mongol identity they held on to the specific name of the family and ancestry they descended from for centuries.
Central Asia : Until the 1900s it was a very important part of regional politics to have a ruler who was descended from Chinggis Qa'an himself. How is this possible if they threw away their culture? It isn't.
China : Even the Mongols who served the Ch'ing still thought of themselves as Mongols until the fall of the Manchus. Did they speak Chinese? Of course, they needed to talk to people. Did they eat Chinese food? You can't exactly get nomad cuisine in Beijing (a city the Mongols built by the way.) Did they still consider themselves Mongols. You bet.
Russia : The Golden Horde, which may have been a seperate political entity from the Yuan was certainly Mongolian culturally, existed for centuries as an important regional player. In fact the Kalmyks, who emigrated in the 16th century got up and left Russia en masse in order to avoid Catherine's reforms that would have attempted to inflict Russian culture and politics on them.
Did they adopt local practices? Of course they did, all peoples do. But it wasn't as quickly and drastically as say, the Europeans who settled America decided they weren't subjects to their leaders anymore.
As an anology consider this - The British who colonized all over the world destroyed and pillaged almost everything they found, didn't introduce any new technology that actually had a beneficial effect, and quickly adopted local customs when they settled areas. Did that stop them from being British? Of course not.
There is no argument against the Mongols inclusion that can't be more aptly applied to any of the other civilizations in the game.
Please do your homework before marginalizing entire peoples.
Thank you for reading.
[Edit, screwed up one of the quotes]
Invisible Rhino
Prince
VladTepes said:
Well to be fair describing the Romans or the Greeks as one civilization is also incorrect, and flat out wrong when considering China. But you can't expect a game like this to include multiple Mongolian civilizations. Look at all the fuss it's caused just to include one!
Btw. The Timurids weren't Mongols.
Timur WISHED he was a Mongol. But he wasn't. Invisible Rhino said:
I'll have to ask you to substantiate that particuler claim
they may have had a religious effect on the woirld; but effecting religion in Tibet is hardley "profound"
not really; while the Germans havent been much, if theve had one things, it been a nation aidentity, and its somthign theve had since the time of Varus and his Legions;
bull****. pure and simple; my own familyl name has a heritage stretching back tot he time of the Romans, and while i proudlly uphold this familly name, it hardley makes me anymore Roman then the next man; descent and genes are nothing, activlly practiced culture is everything
those areas are hardley exents of the empire such as the Mongols whom conqoured China, or those that established themselves in Persia, whom, ironically, were also the most important "mongol" states; all the otheres were of little status, particurlay after it was learned how to squarley defeat Mongol armiesYou may have a point; but considerign they they seem to have kept thier culture ONLY because the land they lived neccesitated it isnt much of an example, when the mongol conqerors of say china wholesale abandoned thier old ways, and today are infact considered just another Chinese Dynasty by some
A)the Brithish invente dloads of technology, most notirouslly, are responsible for puttign the entire world into the industrial revolution
B)the British hardley adopted local cutums; in fact it was wuite the oppiste, as they inforced thier own custums and cultures onto other peoples
[/quote]of course thier is; mainlly because the Mongols, while a peoples whove had an impact on history, were hardley a civilization whos callibre matches the achievment sof greats such as Rome or China,and whos world wide contributions dont match even th emysteriosu mali, whos scolarchship and fame traveld accross the islamic and western world, whos nation served a progenitory of vast amount sof gold; enough to effect the economie sof entire regionsa world away from it, and were active spreaders of what was at the time, the worlds most active and dynamic culture- and while they have thier feats, soem of which I did not before now know of, its still makes hardley any sort of an argument for anything the Mongolins achieved being all that worht while.
am I attemping to marginalize them? No- I'm trying to proove that the rose coloured glasses people have looked at the Mongol at before arnt warrented, and that they need to open thier eyes to mysterious new peoples whom they may have never heard of before, because as it often happens, the "greats" are responsible for a bit less then they are credited, while the "little guy" gets no credit at all.
If it seem slike I want to kill the Mongols reputation at the expense of getting people to learn about new culutres, its sacrifce I'm more then ready to make
Stilgar08
Emperor
The Brits had a great empire but it's gone...
The French, La grande Nation! Hah!
The USA is only a few years old! No history at all!
The Germans are living in the middle of Europe. So what?
Man! Mongolia is a civ, everone knows. Mongolia has achieved a great empire and ruled over it and it was that great that no one ever will forget about it. Neither anyone will ever forget the Egyptians, Greek, Romans or the Germans (even if their "Empire" lasted only a few years - There were other influences from Germany far more worth to mention... (Beethoven or Einstein or Kopernikus)) or the British Empire or the huge culture of the Aztecs or Sumerians... This is what makes them important (at least when it comes to the decision about which civ should be in a game or not): You won't forget about them... I don't know much about Mali, but I take it as it is...
There's just a silly argument and discussion going on here:
The civilizations included (as far as we know yet) ALL deserve to be in! You can argue why the Firaxians don't include other civ's but you could argue that down to every tribe who once has been united and influenced the world in any way, so there's no point!! Why didn't they take Tibet or Australia or Sweden????? The simple answer is: Because they don't have the time and resources to implement everything they want. In terms of business it would be best to give every potential customer the opportunity to play as the civ (or the country or tribe or ethnic group, whatever...) he/she feels he/she belongs to...
BTW, I can see XEN grinning about all the howling in this thread!
Very funny! 
The French, La grande Nation! Hah!
The USA is only a few years old! No history at all!
The Germans are living in the middle of Europe. So what?
Man! Mongolia is a civ, everone knows. Mongolia has achieved a great empire and ruled over it and it was that great that no one ever will forget about it. Neither anyone will ever forget the Egyptians, Greek, Romans or the Germans (even if their "Empire" lasted only a few years - There were other influences from Germany far more worth to mention... (Beethoven or Einstein or Kopernikus)) or the British Empire or the huge culture of the Aztecs or Sumerians... This is what makes them important (at least when it comes to the decision about which civ should be in a game or not): You won't forget about them... I don't know much about Mali, but I take it as it is...
There's just a silly argument and discussion going on here:
The civilizations included (as far as we know yet) ALL deserve to be in! You can argue why the Firaxians don't include other civ's but you could argue that down to every tribe who once has been united and influenced the world in any way, so there's no point!! Why didn't they take Tibet or Australia or Sweden????? The simple answer is: Because they don't have the time and resources to implement everything they want. In terms of business it would be best to give every potential customer the opportunity to play as the civ (or the country or tribe or ethnic group, whatever...) he/she feels he/she belongs to...
BTW, I can see XEN grinning about all the howling in this thread!
Very funny! 
Evie
Pronounced like Eevee
Why do you think I've been steering wide away from confronting you on the mongols topic?
Invisible Rhino
Prince
Xen said:I'd guess its because I have a penchent for dragging out argument into long, draw out slug-fests for the sole reason of beefing up my post-count
It certainly isn't because you know what you're talking about.
I've disproved your argument completely and you are still clinging to your stereotypical views with absurd statements like "affecting the religion of Tibet isn't profound." Go out and read a book and you'll realize what a fool you are. Just because it didn't affect Europe doesn't mean it wasn't profound. There's a large chunk of land called Asia that you might want to look into understanding a little better.
What third rate website did you get this garbage from? It's wrong. Once again there are plenty of actual books on this subject and I encourage you to try to read one before you argue about it.
You're resorting to a ridiculous double standard here. If you're willing to say that those people were Germans when they had absolutely NO cultural identity as German people how are you going to spout this garbage about the Mongols giving up their identity which they actually held on to? This is very bad logic on your part.
Actively practiced culture in the sense that it dictated local and regional politics and even social interactions within the communities. Sorry to burst your bubble Xen but your pre-conceived notions don't measure up to the facts. You are reading my posts but you obviously are chosing not to understand them. You're giving the American standard of what a name means. Think a little broader.
I can't take you seriously when you say stuff like this. Anyone who knows the first thing about Chinese history knows how completely wrong that is. There may be people who consider the Yuan just another Chinese dynasty but they are all working for the People's Daily. The people in China at the time certainly did not consider the Yuan to be a Chinese dynasty, and neither did the Ming or the Manchus (who by the way were more Mongolian than they were Chinese, although of course they were actually neither). Claims like this just make it clear how very very little you know about the Mongols and how very very much you want to put them down for no logical reason.
Trying to get into an argument about who is "more" of a civilization than anyone else is silly and I won't get drawn into that.
You haven't yet made a point about why the Mongols shouldn't be included other than their lack of technological invention....and as for that consider that the...
Inca never even invented the wheel, and they are included.
Aztecs did not invent anything that is still in use today in that part of the world or anywhere else. Sure pyramid building was impressive but its hardly a functional technology. Yet they are included.
Mali are so poorly understood that no significant technology of any type can be confidentally thought to be a Mali invention. Yet they are included.
Russians invented almost nothing of their own, they just (like the Mongols) took inventions of other people to new places through their massive land empire. Yet they are included.
In case you didn't pick it up the first dozen times - go out and read a book on the subject before you attempt to talk about it any more.
Invisible Rhino said:
disproved? hardley; you merelly apply your logic to the back end of nowhere; sure it happens to be the Mongolian homland, and, obviouslly, they retianed thier native culture; but what about in thie rmighty conquests? outside the steppes, we dont see an onch of Mongolian culture; even in Tibet, thier significane is by effecting th elocal culture alreayd developed; not installign thier own culture into it
give me links. give me titles. give me authors. I will read, give me the resources to do it.
A)obviouslly enough, thier was a United german cultures; its the onlythign the held themtogether int he wake of threats such as the Romans and Huns
B)as I;ve said before, in the lands the mongols conqoured, the Mongols whole-sale threw away thier culture; perhaps this didnt happen outside the step but give me one god-damned example of when a Mongol over lord kept thier culture when out side the step- no, i dont mean retaining thier ancestry, I mean thier actual culture- you cant give one, you merelyl contijue to say how wrong I am, and how the mongol retined thie rnative culture in the native land- no **** sherlock, I've been saying they ditched it in there conqoured lands this entire time
prove it; give me the examples; the burden of the proof is you in this case, and I'm asking you to substantiate your claim by giving us either direct links to internet documents, or the titles of books and thier respective authors that can give clear cut documentation that the Mongols did in fact keep thie rnative culture in thier forign conquests, that they effected them in day to day life, and that this culture continues until they were deposed by native rulers
apperentlly, your views arnt shared by everyone; I've been here quite a while, and over that time, I've seen a few sinic posters around talk of these exact events, and including with how to regard the Yuan dynasty; the general feel is that they were legitmite dynasty by the end of thier reign because they did exactley what I've been claimign they did in thier non-steppe territioes; they nationalized, or in this case, sinisices to go along exactley with the native culture; sure they were founded by an invasion of steppe barbarians; but by the end they were just as Chinese as anyone in thier empire.
The definition of Civlization according to the Merriam Webster Dictionary
Civilization
1) a relitivlly high leval of cultural and technological development
2)the culture charactiersitc of a time or place
--------------------------------------------------
by this defintion, the Mongols dont even place as a civlization at all in the first definition; they cound't even forge metal by the time of Chingis Khan, let alone the fact that thier culture had stalled to be about the same peak of social development that was near universal amoung steppe tribes from the time Qin. if not before that.
the second definition would have them, but almost as if in a past-tense refernce, rather then an active or living culture
its not likes its the Mongols own fault they didnt have high culture or technology, its merelly the end result fo the land they lived on; the steppe neccissitate the sort of life style the Mongols developed for themselvs; they, when in new lands, that allowed for new styles of life, the Mongols opted to adopt them is no surprise; but the fact is, they didnt do anyworhtwhile other then a short lived conqouest of eurasia, and while it had a great deal of localalized importance in variosu regions, for the most part life went on as if the Mongols had never invaded in the first place
thats false actually; the wheel was known to the Incas, as well tas the Aztecks, and IIRC, the Maya as well, in mesoamerica, they lacked draft animals to make such an invention worhtwhile; why the Incas never made use of it beyond childrens toys we may never know, though I'd assume that the llama must make a less then enthusiatic pack animal at times, and that combined with the geography mush have ahd soem effect. we may never know the specifics of it however.
the Aztecs, like the Inca and Maya represent important new world developing civlizationsl if they had been left alone for another century, thier is no doubt they, or thier successors would have been just as sophisticated as the Roman or Chinese empires at thier height in antiquity
yet the end result of theologica scholarship that wne ton in its lands went on to effect the entierty of the islamic world, and how religious doctirne woudl be interpreted for ages; somthign that continues to be felt to this very day.
well, Dr. Tessla might dissagree with you on the specifics of not inventing anything worhtwhile; but the biggest difference betweenthe Mongols and Russians was that the Mongols were a one time event; they had thier un, and then they dissapered; the Russians built up a real agraian base society, a real settled civlization, and went on to build thier power base, and create a unique and lasting culture unliek anythign else the woirld had seen, combining elements o westnern Roman, eastern Chrsitan, turkick, and yes, they even took a page perhaps out of steppe culture perhaps wheen dealign in thos elands; and moreover, the Russians lasted; they have been around, and have been a major influencing factor now for centuries, and thier culture truelly has had a world impact; the mongosl had a one time hurrah, and then quicklly dissapere from the history books from being a power of worldlly importance, even becoming less then stellar in regional affairs
You shoudl read the book "Guns, Germs, and Steel" its purpose is essentially to record why things are the way they are, and have given me a real new look on what callsifies as civlization, and what in turn makes particuler civlizations important or not; the Romans, Chinese, the Mali, the English, and Arabs; these civlizatiosn have all left alasting impact on the entire world through methods of war, of culture, of science, scholarship, of the arts, and deutiful legacies which natiosn cling onto in rapture and astonishment of; the Mongols had a huge empire; but they had noen of technological glores, the wonder monument sof scholarlly arts, nor the lasting influcne of "doing things the Mongol way" other then wanton bloodseh and cruelty which isnt hard to find in any people at a particuler point in time. the only claim to fame for the mongols is that thier conquests enabled them to doa hundred regional thing things which led to soem real world turner events, but have non of the cultureal legacies that the firmer civlizatiosn have; the Mongolians have a distrinct culturel but its hardley one that has made a great world name for itself, not one that invites much awe or rapture, and it certinalyl dosent have much of any outside influnce; it is ALL these things that need to be taken into acount when judging a civlization, and you have to take them all incontext with other civlizations, nto stand them alone on a pedetal, to make passing, indipendent judgment- no, you need to throw it into the mix, and see how it ranks when compared to others; and that how I take my view of mongol civlization, and culture, how it, and its effects, and all thsoe criteria in which I have mentioned, compare with other civlizations, and cultures.
